Wish we would have gotten guys who have higher upsides than Kason Gabbard, David Murphy ... but at least we got a Dominican outfielder who just got his license.
Kevin Goldstein on the trade: It's a good deal for both teams, as Beltre does have HUGE upside and remarkable tools. Of course he's 17 and very very far away from that ceiling as well. You won't be able to judge this one for a while.
btw, who names there kid Kason? That should raise some eyebrows.
*********
Also, T.R. Sullivan of MLB.com reports that the Mark Teixeira trade has been finalized, with lefthander Matt Harrison being confirmed as the fourth player – and a fifth player, Class A lefthander Beau Jones, being added to the deal as well. Jones has gone 5-0, 2.96 with three saves for Low A Rome (48.2 innings, 38 hits, 12 walks, 46 strikeouts) and 0-0, 15.26 in five appearances for High A Myrtle Beach. The hard-throwing reliever was a first-round pick in 2005 (41st overall) out of a Louisiana high school.
Medium frame, strong, thick legs. Flexible body. Similar to Sterling Hitchcock. FB has down movement, gets on hitters quickly. CB occasionally tight w/ sweeping break. Straight change has some deception. Potential to develop into power pitcher at the ML level. According to BA back before he was drafted.
Random note: The Dodgers at pick 40 took Luke Hochevar who would hold out, pitch for the FW Cats then be the #1 overall pick the next year. Boston had pick 42 and grabbed Clay Buchholz their top pitching prospect. Beau hasn't developed like the two untouchable guys he was sandwiched between, but good sign that he was thought of in the same group as those guys a couple years ago.
********
Peter Gammons just called Kason Gabbard "Jimmy Key jr." .... wow. I think that's pretty far off, but hopefully Peter's right and I'm wrong.
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Monday, July 30, 2007
Tex Traded!
BREAKING NEWS!
Teixeira has been traded to the Braves
Ken Rosenthal has this:
"The Braves are on the verge of acquiring Rangers first baseman Mark Teixeira.
The deal is done, pending a review of the medical records of the players involved, according to major-league sources.
The Braves will receive Teixeira and left-handed reliever Ron Mahay.
The Rangers will receive catcher Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Class A shortstop Elvis Andrus and two pitching prospects.
One of the prospects is believed to be Class AA left-hander Matt Harrison.
The Rangers had been split on whether they wanted Harrison, in part because he recently experienced shoulder trouble.
However, Harrison underwent an MRI that revealed no damage, and the Rangers evidently are willing to take him despite their concerns."
If the other pitching prospect is JoJo Reyes (doubtful) Jeff Locke or Jaime Richmond or Tommy Hanson I'm happy...more detials when we have them.
*********
The other pitcher is now, apparently, Neftali Feliz which is very interesting. He's another very risky guy, but with crazy upside.
A classic long, lean Dominican righty with some feel for a breaking ball, he limited left-handed hitters to a 4-for-32 (.125) mark with 15 strikeouts last year. 18-year-olds who can throw 98 mph don't grow on trees you know. There's not certainty with him. He is a teenager with a lightning arm who could turn into a frontline starter or a dominant closer, but right now, he's a teenager with a lightning arm.
Very similar to Elvis, 18 year olds who can hold their own in pro ball is a pretty small club...with some pretty good members.
***********
Another note on Salty...WHO WILL CATCH!!! HE'S ONLY PLAYING FIRST BASE BECAUSE ATLANTA HAS BRAIN FREAKING MCCANN!!!! ... sorry, it vexs me to hear everyone talking about guys that they know nothing about, nothing! He can play first once in a while, to give Melhuse some time at the plate...I think Laird is gone now... but he's bat makes him special at cather, but average at first base.
Anyway...where was I? Oh yeah! I stumbled across this on SI.com:
This last consideration may not bother many, but Salty has an unusual family situation. Salty, now 21, married a teacher at his high school in West Palm Beach, Fla., who is now 37, according to records. His wife Ashley, who recently gave birth to their second child, insisted to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that their personal relationship didn't begin until the fall of 2004, when Salty was 18. The Rangers apparently are aware of Salty's family situation and are said to believe he's maturing. Besides, switch-hitting catchers are hard to come by.
New hero...?
Teixeira has been traded to the Braves
Ken Rosenthal has this:
"The Braves are on the verge of acquiring Rangers first baseman Mark Teixeira.
The deal is done, pending a review of the medical records of the players involved, according to major-league sources.
The Braves will receive Teixeira and left-handed reliever Ron Mahay.
The Rangers will receive catcher Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Class A shortstop Elvis Andrus and two pitching prospects.
One of the prospects is believed to be Class AA left-hander Matt Harrison.
The Rangers had been split on whether they wanted Harrison, in part because he recently experienced shoulder trouble.
However, Harrison underwent an MRI that revealed no damage, and the Rangers evidently are willing to take him despite their concerns."
If the other pitching prospect is JoJo Reyes (doubtful) Jeff Locke or Jaime Richmond or Tommy Hanson I'm happy...more detials when we have them.
*********
The other pitcher is now, apparently, Neftali Feliz which is very interesting. He's another very risky guy, but with crazy upside.
A classic long, lean Dominican righty with some feel for a breaking ball, he limited left-handed hitters to a 4-for-32 (.125) mark with 15 strikeouts last year. 18-year-olds who can throw 98 mph don't grow on trees you know. There's not certainty with him. He is a teenager with a lightning arm who could turn into a frontline starter or a dominant closer, but right now, he's a teenager with a lightning arm.
Very similar to Elvis, 18 year olds who can hold their own in pro ball is a pretty small club...with some pretty good members.
***********
Another note on Salty...WHO WILL CATCH!!! HE'S ONLY PLAYING FIRST BASE BECAUSE ATLANTA HAS BRAIN FREAKING MCCANN!!!! ... sorry, it vexs me to hear everyone talking about guys that they know nothing about, nothing! He can play first once in a while, to give Melhuse some time at the plate...I think Laird is gone now... but he's bat makes him special at cather, but average at first base.
Anyway...where was I? Oh yeah! I stumbled across this on SI.com:
This last consideration may not bother many, but Salty has an unusual family situation. Salty, now 21, married a teacher at his high school in West Palm Beach, Fla., who is now 37, according to records. His wife Ashley, who recently gave birth to their second child, insisted to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that their personal relationship didn't begin until the fall of 2004, when Salty was 18. The Rangers apparently are aware of Salty's family situation and are said to believe he's maturing. Besides, switch-hitting catchers are hard to come by.
New hero...?
Friday, July 27, 2007
Lofton Thrice Well!
Max Ramirez is the next in line of young Latin catchers. Ramirez was on the World Roster for the Futures Game, but did not play. He has a very strong arm and walks a lot...two things I like from my catchers. He does strike out a lot, but he has yet to post an OBP under .408 in any of his minor league stops. He's far away from being big league ready, but with Victor Martinez entrenched at the 2 spot I wouldn't be shocked if the Indians moved him for big league help.
I wrote that when I thought the Rangers should target Maximillio Ramirez, along with Shin-Soo Choo, for Eric Gagne. Kudos to JD for getting Max for just Kenny Lofton.
I say "just Kenny Lofton" not because Lofton is a bad player, he's having a nice year, or because he'll provide no value to Cle...he'll provide good outfield defense when they play him left against righties, he'll let Grady Sizemore get a few days off, and let him slide down in the order so the Indians can get better use of his power.
I'm pleased the Rangers are able to get a catcher with a really good bat because Kenny has zero value to this team, long term.
Ramirez is hitting .303/.418/.505 in the Carolina league (where the average hitter has a 720 OPS, compared to Max's 923!) Scouts hate his defense but love his bat. He should be valuable even if he doesn't stick behind the plate. Shoot even if he never makes it...it's just Kenny Lofton!
Nice move JD! I'm glad I actually get to say that!
I wrote that when I thought the Rangers should target Maximillio Ramirez, along with Shin-Soo Choo, for Eric Gagne. Kudos to JD for getting Max for just Kenny Lofton.
I say "just Kenny Lofton" not because Lofton is a bad player, he's having a nice year, or because he'll provide no value to Cle...he'll provide good outfield defense when they play him left against righties, he'll let Grady Sizemore get a few days off, and let him slide down in the order so the Indians can get better use of his power.
I'm pleased the Rangers are able to get a catcher with a really good bat because Kenny has zero value to this team, long term.
Ramirez is hitting .303/.418/.505 in the Carolina league (where the average hitter has a 720 OPS, compared to Max's 923!) Scouts hate his defense but love his bat. He should be valuable even if he doesn't stick behind the plate. Shoot even if he never makes it...it's just Kenny Lofton!
Nice move JD! I'm glad I actually get to say that!
What Should Happen with Tex
The entire idea of trading Tex is so we can win... that idea gets lost from time to time, people (JD?) think that we should trade Teixeira just because his agent always gets the most money for his clients and Tom Hicks won't offer him the most money, so it's better to get something rather than nothing.
I previously covered what the Rangers should do with Tex, however it looks like I underrated the market for Tex. While I got the team right, still think he should go to Atlanta, it now looks like the Braves are willing to part with much more than I thought they would. I figured they would see that they were basically bidding alone, but the LAAAofA Angels have really benefited the Rangers by jonesing for Tex.
[I really don't want Tex to go to the Angels, not because I'm afraid of trading him in the division, why should the Rangers care if the Angels beat them they're rebuilding anyway? It's because the trade offers we've been getting from them suck!]
Ken Rosenthal made my baseball pants happy!
"The game is now, "Can you top this?"
The Braves, major-league sources say, have made the Rangers a whopper of an offer for first baseman Mark Teixeira.
The Rangers evidently would receive three highly regarded young players — catcher Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Class AA left-hander Matt Harrison and Class A shortstop Elvis Andrus — while sending the Braves only Teixeira.
At a time when teams are reluctant to trade inexpensive prospects for high-priced veterans, such a deal would be a coup for Rangers general manager Jon Daniels.
If he can beat the Braves' 3-for-1 proposal, more power to him."
Well more power to me, because I'm going to try and beat it! I like Salty (more on that later), I like Harrison, but I don't really like Andrus.
There are some teams that would rank Salty, Harrison and Andrus and the Braves top 3 prospects. If the Rangers get that haul, it's def not bad and I'll applaud JD for it. However, I think we can do just a little bit better. If we follow these easy steps:
Step 1) Remove Elivs Andrus from the trade.
In every scouting report of him you'll read, the word "toolsy" pops up in the first sentence. This is baseball slang for "not good at baseball." If I'm trading a superstar and getting a guy back who is just "upside" and "potential" he'd better be a pitcher!
Step 2) Add Chase Fontaine and Jeff Locke.
Andrus could turn out to be a good player, but I like Chase Fontaine better. The best thing about Fontaine, other than the fact that he's a very good hitter who draws walks in bunches; fundamentally sound both at the plate and in the field; your basic baseball rat who loves playing and takes well to coaching, is that he isn't as highly regared as Andrus...even though he should be. Virtually all GM's overrate the upside of players and underrate the downside, making a guy like Fontaine who isn't near as flashy as Andrus but is a much more accomplished player available for cheaper.
The fact that Fontaine is less highly regarded than Andrus means that we could get him AND someone else for the same price as the King. That someone else should be Jeff Locke. I spoke before about not wanting someone who's full of "potential" unless they're a pitcher... well Locke is full of potential but he's a big lefty! Drafted in the second round last year out of a New Hampshire High School, Locke is a tall, teenage lefthander who can sit in the low 90s and has a very high ceiling; excellent control for his age and experience; very few innings on his arm from pitching in a cold-weather climate; very good makeup.
Step 3) Add Ron Mayday to the deal.
Most teams will have trouble making a 4-1 deal, adding a decent lefty reliever to the mix should allieve those worries. If they insist on CJ Wilson, as much as I love him (and I do! I get lost in those eyes, I just want to stroke his faux-hawk and spoon with him on a bear skin rug listening to Saosin over and over again...was that weired to share with everyone?...Sorry) but I'd let him go in this deal.
Step 4) Re-trade Jarrod Saltalamacchia.
Salty, as his teammated have to geniously nicknamed him, is a pretty darned good player. Big switch hitting cather; good eye; nice pop; he's no threat to Pudge's gold glove record, in fact he'll probably end his career with the same number of gold gloves as me, but he's good enough defensively to stay behind the plate. His upside is about that of a Jason Varitek...if Tek could switch hit. In other words, good...not great. Salty is the second best catcher in the NL East right now, however he happens to play on the same team as the best catcher in the NL East, Brian McCann. As such, every team knows that Atlanta is going to trade him. The fact that virutally every team could use a good young catcher has created an interesting situation where I now believe that Salty's trade value exceeds that of his actual value between the lines.
We could use him as a player and that would be ok, but if we could get something really good in return (like something that can throw the ball) I'm interested. Word out of Pittsburg is that the Pirates have been trying to pry Salty from the Braves. They've been dangling Ian Snell + prospects, the Braves haven't gone for the bate but I would! Personally I don't think the best interest of the Pirates is to trade good young arms, but I'm fine if we can get then in Arlington. The Buccos have grown tired of Ronny Paulino, who I'd also take off their hands.
Step 5) Trade Salty, Arias, and Chris Davis to Pittsburg for Ian Snell and Ronny Paulino.
That nets the Rangers a good young catcher (Paulino) a young pre-arb starter who would step in the rotation right now (Snell) a high on-base scrappy middle infield prospect (Fontaine) and two good lefty pitching prospects (Harrison, Locke) basically for Tex and a couple overvalued prospects who won't be any good.
Snell is a higly talented pitcher, who's having a good year for Pitt. Because he doesn't want to play in Pittsburg any more, he's been trying his darndest to get traded (true I doubt that Texas is his #1 choice but he doesn't have that much say in the matter.) He hasn't done anything as crazy as this former Pirate/Ranger, but that's a good thing.
Paulino is very talented and has raked at every stop he's every had in baseball...but he's having a bad year and some the Pirates brass have become worried about his conditioning. Very good time to buy low.
So next year the Rangers rotation is
Millwood
Snell
McCarthy
Hurley
Padilla
*they should put Tejeda on the Jaquin Benoit plan*
**Harrison will replace Padilla when his crazy contract is up
Then in a couple more years add Porcello for Millwood...Oh..wait...nevermind
[bangs head against door]
does it really matter? Ranger's screw it up anyway!
I previously covered what the Rangers should do with Tex, however it looks like I underrated the market for Tex. While I got the team right, still think he should go to Atlanta, it now looks like the Braves are willing to part with much more than I thought they would. I figured they would see that they were basically bidding alone, but the LAAAofA Angels have really benefited the Rangers by jonesing for Tex.
[I really don't want Tex to go to the Angels, not because I'm afraid of trading him in the division, why should the Rangers care if the Angels beat them they're rebuilding anyway? It's because the trade offers we've been getting from them suck!]
Ken Rosenthal made my baseball pants happy!
"The game is now, "Can you top this?"
The Braves, major-league sources say, have made the Rangers a whopper of an offer for first baseman Mark Teixeira.
The Rangers evidently would receive three highly regarded young players — catcher Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Class AA left-hander Matt Harrison and Class A shortstop Elvis Andrus — while sending the Braves only Teixeira.
At a time when teams are reluctant to trade inexpensive prospects for high-priced veterans, such a deal would be a coup for Rangers general manager Jon Daniels.
If he can beat the Braves' 3-for-1 proposal, more power to him."
Well more power to me, because I'm going to try and beat it! I like Salty (more on that later), I like Harrison, but I don't really like Andrus.
There are some teams that would rank Salty, Harrison and Andrus and the Braves top 3 prospects. If the Rangers get that haul, it's def not bad and I'll applaud JD for it. However, I think we can do just a little bit better. If we follow these easy steps:
Step 1) Remove Elivs Andrus from the trade.
In every scouting report of him you'll read, the word "toolsy" pops up in the first sentence. This is baseball slang for "not good at baseball." If I'm trading a superstar and getting a guy back who is just "upside" and "potential" he'd better be a pitcher!
Step 2) Add Chase Fontaine and Jeff Locke.
Andrus could turn out to be a good player, but I like Chase Fontaine better. The best thing about Fontaine, other than the fact that he's a very good hitter who draws walks in bunches; fundamentally sound both at the plate and in the field; your basic baseball rat who loves playing and takes well to coaching, is that he isn't as highly regared as Andrus...even though he should be. Virtually all GM's overrate the upside of players and underrate the downside, making a guy like Fontaine who isn't near as flashy as Andrus but is a much more accomplished player available for cheaper.
The fact that Fontaine is less highly regarded than Andrus means that we could get him AND someone else for the same price as the King. That someone else should be Jeff Locke. I spoke before about not wanting someone who's full of "potential" unless they're a pitcher... well Locke is full of potential but he's a big lefty! Drafted in the second round last year out of a New Hampshire High School, Locke is a tall, teenage lefthander who can sit in the low 90s and has a very high ceiling; excellent control for his age and experience; very few innings on his arm from pitching in a cold-weather climate; very good makeup.
Step 3) Add Ron Mayday to the deal.
Most teams will have trouble making a 4-1 deal, adding a decent lefty reliever to the mix should allieve those worries. If they insist on CJ Wilson, as much as I love him (and I do! I get lost in those eyes, I just want to stroke his faux-hawk and spoon with him on a bear skin rug listening to Saosin over and over again...was that weired to share with everyone?...Sorry) but I'd let him go in this deal.
Step 4) Re-trade Jarrod Saltalamacchia.
Salty, as his teammated have to geniously nicknamed him, is a pretty darned good player. Big switch hitting cather; good eye; nice pop; he's no threat to Pudge's gold glove record, in fact he'll probably end his career with the same number of gold gloves as me, but he's good enough defensively to stay behind the plate. His upside is about that of a Jason Varitek...if Tek could switch hit. In other words, good...not great. Salty is the second best catcher in the NL East right now, however he happens to play on the same team as the best catcher in the NL East, Brian McCann. As such, every team knows that Atlanta is going to trade him. The fact that virutally every team could use a good young catcher has created an interesting situation where I now believe that Salty's trade value exceeds that of his actual value between the lines.
We could use him as a player and that would be ok, but if we could get something really good in return (like something that can throw the ball) I'm interested. Word out of Pittsburg is that the Pirates have been trying to pry Salty from the Braves. They've been dangling Ian Snell + prospects, the Braves haven't gone for the bate but I would! Personally I don't think the best interest of the Pirates is to trade good young arms, but I'm fine if we can get then in Arlington. The Buccos have grown tired of Ronny Paulino, who I'd also take off their hands.
Step 5) Trade Salty, Arias, and Chris Davis to Pittsburg for Ian Snell and Ronny Paulino.
That nets the Rangers a good young catcher (Paulino) a young pre-arb starter who would step in the rotation right now (Snell) a high on-base scrappy middle infield prospect (Fontaine) and two good lefty pitching prospects (Harrison, Locke) basically for Tex and a couple overvalued prospects who won't be any good.
Snell is a higly talented pitcher, who's having a good year for Pitt. Because he doesn't want to play in Pittsburg any more, he's been trying his darndest to get traded (true I doubt that Texas is his #1 choice but he doesn't have that much say in the matter.) He hasn't done anything as crazy as this former Pirate/Ranger, but that's a good thing.
Paulino is very talented and has raked at every stop he's every had in baseball...but he's having a bad year and some the Pirates brass have become worried about his conditioning. Very good time to buy low.
So next year the Rangers rotation is
Millwood
Snell
McCarthy
Hurley
Padilla
*they should put Tejeda on the Jaquin Benoit plan*
**Harrison will replace Padilla when his crazy contract is up
Then in a couple more years add Porcello for Millwood...Oh..wait...nevermind
[bangs head against door]
does it really matter? Ranger's screw it up anyway!
Thursday, July 26, 2007
More Vick
Tim Donaghy just set the odds on Vick playing his last game in the NFL at 4-1 and 1-1 that he's played his last for the Falcons.
Atlanta opens up training camp on the same day that it's starting quarterback/highest payed/marquee player is arraigned on dog fighting charges... you can't make that stuff up.
Buck up Atlanta fans, you've got Joey Harrington, Warrick Dunn, Joe Horn
[Lincoln learns that it is not 2004]
...Oh, um...ouch...At least Tex will play for the Braves soon!
Hopefully Teixeira won't go for a ride on the Michael Vick Experience.
Things are going to get worse for Vick before they get better. The feds have a 91% con-vick-tion percentage... Vick is also still a suspect in this case.
Man, sports are depressing!...I'm just waiting for Jon Lester to pitch again.
Atlanta opens up training camp on the same day that it's starting quarterback/highest payed/marquee player is arraigned on dog fighting charges... you can't make that stuff up.
Buck up Atlanta fans, you've got Joey Harrington, Warrick Dunn, Joe Horn
[Lincoln learns that it is not 2004]
...Oh, um...ouch...At least Tex will play for the Braves soon!
Hopefully Teixeira won't go for a ride on the Michael Vick Experience.
Things are going to get worse for Vick before they get better. The feds have a 91% con-vick-tion percentage... Vick is also still a suspect in this case.
Man, sports are depressing!...I'm just waiting for Jon Lester to pitch again.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
756*
I didn't think it was actually possible. Allan "Bud" Selig made the right choice and still screwed it up.
Selig was there in the city by the bay for the Giants game against the fightin' Mark Teixeira's (sorry...not yet), he should have been there...he had to be there.
"All citizens in this country are innocent until proven guilty" Selig said in a press release before the game, adding "except for Bonds, I mean that guy is terrible and evil and mean and a cheater and he stole my milk money and he's not nice to me like Hank Aaron is." (I paraphrased that last part from what was going through the Commissioner's head)
I'm really glad that the head of the sport I love is willing to throw player about to break a cherished record under the bus.
Selig doesn't want Bonds to have the record because he's linked with steroids...look in the mirror pal. You were on watch when this thing escalated. You were the captain when the ship hit the iceberg, the passangers aren't going to blame the iceberg. Blame goes up, and it stops with you.
Selig can't admit that. He has let his personal feelings for Bonds/intertwined with his own deep seated personal insecurities get in the way of his job. The Commissioner ought to be there at major/historic baseball events. He ought to be sitting front row, by the Giants dugout, standing and cheering for Bonds...for history...for baseball.
Selig doesn't want Bonds to pass Aaron, a man he greatly admires and respects. Ford Frick didn't want Maris to pass Ruth, a man he greatly admired and respected. Frick called for the establishment of multiple record books (the astericks.) Frick did this as a means of delegitamizing Maris' accomplishments in the public/and histories eyes.
Selig doesn't want Bonds to pass Hammerin' Hank because he thinks people will link Bonds with power, power with steroids, steroids with cheating, cheating with baseball, and baseball with Selig.
To understand why this linkage bothers Selig so tremendously that he cannot do his job properly it is necessary to understand more about Selig, the man. Bud Selig is and will always be a nerd. Allan Huber Selig was that incredibly awkward kid in class who was, analytically, smarter than most but lacking in social development. His facial features are too deep set to be considered classically handsome. Selig couldn't talk to girls, he's a nerd. But, like all nerds he just wants to be loved. Why else would a seventy year old man go by "Bud"? He wants to be your friend. He wants to be remembered fondly. He wants to get to second base with a cheerleader!
Because his schoolmates rejected him, Allan (I will not call him "Bud" anymore...he is not my Bud, he is ruining the game I love... he's a nerd) did what all good nerds do, he found a fantasy that would not reject him. If he were a little younger he'd be a Star Wars Geek. Selig fixated on something cool, baseball. He fixated on one team, the Milwaukee Braves. As he got older fixated on a player, Hank Aaron.
What Selig doesn't get, what Ford Frick didn't get, is that just because one player passes another player on a list the player that got passed is not erased from history. Roger Maris is not a better player than Babe Ruth. Bonds is a better player than Aaron, but that's not the point. The history of baseball is big enough for Aaron and Bonds, no asterisks is necessary.
Selig wants to diminish Bonds accomplishments because he's afraid of condoning Bonds (who, btw, has still never failed a drug test) and harming Hank Aaron's legacy. The only legacy Allan Selig is harming is his own.
Selig was there in the city by the bay for the Giants game against the fightin' Mark Teixeira's (sorry...not yet), he should have been there...he had to be there.
"All citizens in this country are innocent until proven guilty" Selig said in a press release before the game, adding "except for Bonds, I mean that guy is terrible and evil and mean and a cheater and he stole my milk money and he's not nice to me like Hank Aaron is." (I paraphrased that last part from what was going through the Commissioner's head)
I'm really glad that the head of the sport I love is willing to throw player about to break a cherished record under the bus.
Selig doesn't want Bonds to have the record because he's linked with steroids...look in the mirror pal. You were on watch when this thing escalated. You were the captain when the ship hit the iceberg, the passangers aren't going to blame the iceberg. Blame goes up, and it stops with you.
Selig can't admit that. He has let his personal feelings for Bonds/intertwined with his own deep seated personal insecurities get in the way of his job. The Commissioner ought to be there at major/historic baseball events. He ought to be sitting front row, by the Giants dugout, standing and cheering for Bonds...for history...for baseball.
Selig doesn't want Bonds to pass Aaron, a man he greatly admires and respects. Ford Frick didn't want Maris to pass Ruth, a man he greatly admired and respected. Frick called for the establishment of multiple record books (the astericks.) Frick did this as a means of delegitamizing Maris' accomplishments in the public/and histories eyes.
Selig doesn't want Bonds to pass Hammerin' Hank because he thinks people will link Bonds with power, power with steroids, steroids with cheating, cheating with baseball, and baseball with Selig.
To understand why this linkage bothers Selig so tremendously that he cannot do his job properly it is necessary to understand more about Selig, the man. Bud Selig is and will always be a nerd. Allan Huber Selig was that incredibly awkward kid in class who was, analytically, smarter than most but lacking in social development. His facial features are too deep set to be considered classically handsome. Selig couldn't talk to girls, he's a nerd. But, like all nerds he just wants to be loved. Why else would a seventy year old man go by "Bud"? He wants to be your friend. He wants to be remembered fondly. He wants to get to second base with a cheerleader!
Because his schoolmates rejected him, Allan (I will not call him "Bud" anymore...he is not my Bud, he is ruining the game I love... he's a nerd) did what all good nerds do, he found a fantasy that would not reject him. If he were a little younger he'd be a Star Wars Geek. Selig fixated on something cool, baseball. He fixated on one team, the Milwaukee Braves. As he got older fixated on a player, Hank Aaron.
What Selig doesn't get, what Ford Frick didn't get, is that just because one player passes another player on a list the player that got passed is not erased from history. Roger Maris is not a better player than Babe Ruth. Bonds is a better player than Aaron, but that's not the point. The history of baseball is big enough for Aaron and Bonds, no asterisks is necessary.
Selig wants to diminish Bonds accomplishments because he's afraid of condoning Bonds (who, btw, has still never failed a drug test) and harming Hank Aaron's legacy. The only legacy Allan Selig is harming is his own.
Monday, July 23, 2007
Blue Springs Missouri, the town God forgot
Time for the all encompassing Missouri-baseball-road-trip-blog. Or to our Spanish readers, El camino de viaje de Missouri de basebol. de blog?? For starters, we just want to say that many things both surprised and disappointed us. And Lincoln's quest for a new favorite baseball team just got a little more interesting.
Our journey begins in the Gateway to the West, St. Louis, MO.
Some quick highs and lows about the city before we delve into the sports aspect of this trip. First, City Diner is a great way to start a trip. Great food, nostalgia bursting from the seams. A on food, A+ on ambiance. Second, the Anheuser Busch tour kicks ass!!! It's free. It offers free beer!! You get to see beer being made. It offers free beer!! You see the crazy production line (albeit Natty Light, the bastard child of beer), and did I mention the free beer?!?! Third, the bar scene is strong to fairly strong. Right along the mighty Mississip, close to the Arch and to Busch stadium. Slight negative for the fact that it overlooks East St. Louis, runner up in the place that God forgot contest. Finally, the women of St. Louis are smoking hot! There wasn't a one place we went that a solid 8.5 or 9 wasn't at. Several 10's as well. In the words of the immortal Billy Bob, I'd give St. Louis women "a 10, a 10, a fuckin' 10."
Onto St. Louis sports, which consists of Cardinals baseball. Period. It is well documented that Lincoln is a fan of the Red birds. Or should I say was. The pluses. The stadium is very nice; a very new, urban feel to it. Nice view of the Arch in the outfield and I personally liked the ground entrance to the field. A highly anticipated match up between the Cards and the Barry Bondses.
The negatives. Side note, I could write a novel about them so this is the abbreviated version. Way too many people. Hot! (I must say, the monsoon season in Texas has really skewed my perception of weather in other places.) Getting to the game 2 hours early and never being told our standing room only seats now magically require a wristband. Being asked to move AFTER the game has started and only when Bonds came to bat. Being lied to numerous times just to get us out of the way. And finally, being asked to watch the game from a freaking stairwell on the 3rd deck, about 800 yards away from home plate. Pretty unreal. We did end up getting very decent seats which led us to another negative/possible positive. Annoying Taylor Hicks look-alike Cards fan who harassed the 2 Giants fans the entire game by spewing lies, erroneous facts, and just downright absurdities the entire time. It was very fun taunting him right back with facts and the such. Morons have a tuff time with facts. I must say, I have never gone to a game of any kind rooting openly for one team, only to leave rooting for the other. This actually happened. Mission accomplished St. Louis Cardinals. Polarize and turn fans against you. Hats off. All in all though, it was a fun game that with the passing of time isn't quite as bad as right after the game. Solid B/B+.
We now move to the second half of our trip, Kansas City, and the voyage there. Might I say that after being up for 37 straight hours, a mini road trip can do funny things to you. Like hallucinate, ramble, sleep-drive, and do a pretend radio show to practice for a show you don't actually have. Yes, indeed we here at Sports Bullies have grand dreams of some day making it to the show and casting our voices out there amongst the talking heads and prevailing senses of the sports world in hopes of actually bringing hard hitting sports talk with a great blend of humor. Basically, this blog spoken aloud.
Back to the trip. Upon arriving in the afor mentioned Blue Springs, we quickly realized there was a serious event happening. Summer, apparently the largest convention just outside of Kansas City had rented every room in every hotel not named the Econolodge. (The inside joke here being that is the actual reason given, SUMMER, for why there were no rooms available.) So we settled into the Econlodge, whose motto is, "Not even hookers come here, so it's family friendly." Once in our room, we quickly realized that not only did the lights not work, but neither did the T.V. At least the AC worked. Upon entering the bathroom, we saw that it had been converted into a duel bathroom/river resort as was evident from the half inch of water covering the floor. An amazing room indeed, worthy of the $49.99 rate.
Breakfast the next day revealed that the Bob Evans is very much the local hang out for octogenarians. It was reminiscent of the South Park episode 'Grey Dawn' where all the old people go to the Country Kitchen Buffet. Denny's was very similar to the BE (Bob Evans for our non Blue Springs readers.)
We settled on Applebees and were rewarded with a Jessica Alba lookalike for a waitress. This girl obviously was Miss Blue Springs for like 5 years running. Pretty sure a big tip and word we were from a place that had 3 stop lights could have pried here from the town. One last note form Blue Springs, the fireworks/blue spring art deco in front of the BE was a nice touch to the town. Kinda told you what you were in for if you stopped there.
The actual game it self was pretty awesome. Great seats, friendly fans, and an up close view of Alex Gordon. And I must say, the dude has forceps the size of my freakin leg. I think when he bunts, its actually a warning track shot. No lie. Pluses from the stadium include great views, very nice facilities for as old as it is, decent priced food, and drink give aways to designated drivers. The only negative would be the $25 baseballs in the fan shop; hopefully the Rangers don't read this and get an idea. As for the game itself, it was about as good as you could expect from a D-Rays-Royals game. A great way to cap off a decent little baseball trip in the great State of Missouri. Overall, I'd rate it a 8 out of 10.
Our journey begins in the Gateway to the West, St. Louis, MO.
Some quick highs and lows about the city before we delve into the sports aspect of this trip. First, City Diner is a great way to start a trip. Great food, nostalgia bursting from the seams. A on food, A+ on ambiance. Second, the Anheuser Busch tour kicks ass!!! It's free. It offers free beer!! You get to see beer being made. It offers free beer!! You see the crazy production line (albeit Natty Light, the bastard child of beer), and did I mention the free beer?!?! Third, the bar scene is strong to fairly strong. Right along the mighty Mississip, close to the Arch and to Busch stadium. Slight negative for the fact that it overlooks East St. Louis, runner up in the place that God forgot contest. Finally, the women of St. Louis are smoking hot! There wasn't a one place we went that a solid 8.5 or 9 wasn't at. Several 10's as well. In the words of the immortal Billy Bob, I'd give St. Louis women "a 10, a 10, a fuckin' 10."
Onto St. Louis sports, which consists of Cardinals baseball. Period. It is well documented that Lincoln is a fan of the Red birds. Or should I say was. The pluses. The stadium is very nice; a very new, urban feel to it. Nice view of the Arch in the outfield and I personally liked the ground entrance to the field. A highly anticipated match up between the Cards and the Barry Bondses.
The negatives. Side note, I could write a novel about them so this is the abbreviated version. Way too many people. Hot! (I must say, the monsoon season in Texas has really skewed my perception of weather in other places.) Getting to the game 2 hours early and never being told our standing room only seats now magically require a wristband. Being asked to move AFTER the game has started and only when Bonds came to bat. Being lied to numerous times just to get us out of the way. And finally, being asked to watch the game from a freaking stairwell on the 3rd deck, about 800 yards away from home plate. Pretty unreal. We did end up getting very decent seats which led us to another negative/possible positive. Annoying Taylor Hicks look-alike Cards fan who harassed the 2 Giants fans the entire game by spewing lies, erroneous facts, and just downright absurdities the entire time. It was very fun taunting him right back with facts and the such. Morons have a tuff time with facts. I must say, I have never gone to a game of any kind rooting openly for one team, only to leave rooting for the other. This actually happened. Mission accomplished St. Louis Cardinals. Polarize and turn fans against you. Hats off. All in all though, it was a fun game that with the passing of time isn't quite as bad as right after the game. Solid B/B+.
We now move to the second half of our trip, Kansas City, and the voyage there. Might I say that after being up for 37 straight hours, a mini road trip can do funny things to you. Like hallucinate, ramble, sleep-drive, and do a pretend radio show to practice for a show you don't actually have. Yes, indeed we here at Sports Bullies have grand dreams of some day making it to the show and casting our voices out there amongst the talking heads and prevailing senses of the sports world in hopes of actually bringing hard hitting sports talk with a great blend of humor. Basically, this blog spoken aloud.
Back to the trip. Upon arriving in the afor mentioned Blue Springs, we quickly realized there was a serious event happening. Summer, apparently the largest convention just outside of Kansas City had rented every room in every hotel not named the Econolodge. (The inside joke here being that is the actual reason given, SUMMER, for why there were no rooms available.) So we settled into the Econlodge, whose motto is, "Not even hookers come here, so it's family friendly." Once in our room, we quickly realized that not only did the lights not work, but neither did the T.V. At least the AC worked. Upon entering the bathroom, we saw that it had been converted into a duel bathroom/river resort as was evident from the half inch of water covering the floor. An amazing room indeed, worthy of the $49.99 rate.
Breakfast the next day revealed that the Bob Evans is very much the local hang out for octogenarians. It was reminiscent of the South Park episode 'Grey Dawn' where all the old people go to the Country Kitchen Buffet. Denny's was very similar to the BE (Bob Evans for our non Blue Springs readers.)
We settled on Applebees and were rewarded with a Jessica Alba lookalike for a waitress. This girl obviously was Miss Blue Springs for like 5 years running. Pretty sure a big tip and word we were from a place that had 3 stop lights could have pried here from the town. One last note form Blue Springs, the fireworks/blue spring art deco in front of the BE was a nice touch to the town. Kinda told you what you were in for if you stopped there.
The actual game it self was pretty awesome. Great seats, friendly fans, and an up close view of Alex Gordon. And I must say, the dude has forceps the size of my freakin leg. I think when he bunts, its actually a warning track shot. No lie. Pluses from the stadium include great views, very nice facilities for as old as it is, decent priced food, and drink give aways to designated drivers. The only negative would be the $25 baseballs in the fan shop; hopefully the Rangers don't read this and get an idea. As for the game itself, it was about as good as you could expect from a D-Rays-Royals game. A great way to cap off a decent little baseball trip in the great State of Missouri. Overall, I'd rate it a 8 out of 10.
Crazy Athlete of the Week!
Krevor here with your Crazy Athlete of the Week. And the winner is....Scott Olsen!
This weeks winner is the perfect example of why we do Crazy Athlete of the Week here at Sports Bullies. Florida Marlins pitcher Scott Olsen was arrested Saturday for driving under the influence, resisting an officer with violence, and evading police. A police officer attempted to pull over Olsen at 3:40 am after he was clocked going 48 MPH in a 35 MPH zone. Olsen ignored the police car behind him and continued to drive one mile until he reached his home where he exited his car and sat on a plastic chair in his front lawn. The 6'5 Olsen then tried to kick police officers who used a stun gun (and judging from his mug shot a few fists) to subdue him. This not the first time Olsen has had off the field troubles as he has been previously arrested for DUI and gotten into fights with teammates. I don't even know what to say about this. What is the worst part of this story? That he was driving drunk or that he attempted to fight police officers while sitting in a plastic lawn chair? I choose the latter, just pathetic Olsen. At least you could have tried to bite the cops like Pacman Jones or Fred Evans. Once again Roger Godell is jumping up and down that the Crazy Athlete of the Week was not a football player. Don't celebrate too much Godell, Michael Vick is technically still a member of the NFL.
This weeks winner is the perfect example of why we do Crazy Athlete of the Week here at Sports Bullies. Florida Marlins pitcher Scott Olsen was arrested Saturday for driving under the influence, resisting an officer with violence, and evading police. A police officer attempted to pull over Olsen at 3:40 am after he was clocked going 48 MPH in a 35 MPH zone. Olsen ignored the police car behind him and continued to drive one mile until he reached his home where he exited his car and sat on a plastic chair in his front lawn. The 6'5 Olsen then tried to kick police officers who used a stun gun (and judging from his mug shot a few fists) to subdue him. This not the first time Olsen has had off the field troubles as he has been previously arrested for DUI and gotten into fights with teammates. I don't even know what to say about this. What is the worst part of this story? That he was driving drunk or that he attempted to fight police officers while sitting in a plastic lawn chair? I choose the latter, just pathetic Olsen. At least you could have tried to bite the cops like Pacman Jones or Fred Evans. Once again Roger Godell is jumping up and down that the Crazy Athlete of the Week was not a football player. Don't celebrate too much Godell, Michael Vick is technically still a member of the NFL.
Friday, July 20, 2007
Brainy Baseball
I stumbled on this article by FC Lane and thought it was so good I just had to pass it along:
In 18771 those potent intellects which govern baseball records decided to do something handsome for that orphan skill of the dope sheets, the base on balls. Swayed by the noble impulse of generosity they gave their benevolent feelings full sway and decided that henceforth a base on balls should be a hit, fully equal to a vicious triple or2 a fence crashing home run. There followed a frolicsome period for the batting kings, a period where the man who couldn’t bat three hundred was a chump, the four hundred hitter merely good, and the chief swatter of the bunch, Tip O’Neill, approached the fabulous mark of .500, a record which has never been equalled.
Alarmed by rocketing averages and finding that the dope was becoming fairly glutted the same potent intellects who had been responsible for this wild orgy of batting reversed their august decision and declared that a base on balls was of no account, generally worthless and henceforth even forever should not redound to the credit of the batter who was responsible for such free transportation to first base.
The magnates of that far distant date evidently had never heard of such a thing as a happy medium. The fact having gradually penetrated their well constructed skulls that a base on balls was worth something they immediately rushed in where angels feared to tread, and decreed that it should take rank with all the other hits, including the extra base wallop. Having discovered, in the course of time, that this act was rather rash they at once scrambled back to the zone of safety and refused to give the unfortunate base on balls any notice whatever. “Whole hog or none” was the noble slogan of the magnates of ’87. Having tried the “whole” they decreed the “none” and “none” it has been ever since.
The base on balls is indeed an outcast and a stranger in the records. The most the scorers do for the homeless wanderer is to ignore it utterly. The batter gets no credit for getting a base on balls either through his wits or through respect for his batting powers. But magnanimously, the fact that he is given a pass doesn’t react against him. He isn’t fined or anything like that. His voyage to first base merely doesn’t appear at all, isn’t called a time at bat, plays no part whatever either for or against his batting average.
“The easiest way” might be adopted as the motto in baseball. It was simpler to say a base on balls was valueless than to find out what its value was. The latter process involved some thought and work and usually those who have had the matter in charge have been unable to do the one an unwilling to do the other.
There may have been a time when wildness on the part of the pitcher was the main cause of a base on balls. But that date, if it ever existed, has gone forever. The requirements of the modern game demand almost perfect control. When Larry Cheney of the pennant winning Brooklyns was shunted from the Cubs he complained bitterly of this very policy. “It makes no difference how much stuff a pitcher has,” said Larry, “or how hard it is for the batters to hit him. If he gives a base on balls, yank him out of the box, and if he gives a number, fire him.”
“The strain of pitching nowadays is much greater than it was years ago,” said Dutch Leonard of the Champion Red Sox, “and it gets worse every year. I never saw the old timers pitch but I have looked into the records, and I know. Nowadays if a pitcher weakens to the extent of giving a base on balls the manager is right on his toes and if he pitches a few extra balls it is curtains for him. Pitchers don’t get knocked out of the box anymore. They don’t get a chance.”
In short, the whole progress of modern baseball has tended to eliminate wildness on the part of the pitcher. Wildness, to be sure, hasn’t entirely disappeared and never will. But it is a vanishing fraction, it grows less every year in the long run, and it has ceased to be the main factor in the base on balls.
In 1916, Grover Alexander, a pitcher who has good control, gave 50 base on balls. He took part in 48 games. How often is it good policy for a pitcher to pass a dangerous batter with men on bases? Alexander, redoubtable twirler that he is, would fear batsmen less than most but Alex is crafty and takes no unnecessary chances. No one knows how many times he passed a batter intentionally, but it wouldn’t be beyond reason to account for a large number of his fifty passes in this manner. Certainly if they could not thus be accounted for, the ability which certain batters possess of outguessing the pitcher or waiting him out, would well account for the balance. Alexander is human. Perhaps a few of his fifty passes were given through sheer wildness. But if so they were very, very, few.
Rudolph of Boston allowed 38 bases on balls in 41 contests. How many of them were due to wildness? No one knows, but certainly not many.
Turning to the batting lists we find that Tris Speaker received 82 bases on balls. If you want to know the reason look at his batting average. Ty Cobb received 78. Every one knows why. Eddie Collins got 86. Collins has a double toe hold on the base on balls column. He is known to be a good batter and he is also a past master in the art of waiting them out. A grand exponent of the wait ‘em out policy is Hooper, as every pitcher knows. Bert Shotton of the browns got 111 passes. Doesn’t he deserve any credit for this?
Some time ago John Evers, one of the brainiest stars who ever sat upon a players’ bench, had a heated discussion on the general subject of batting averages. “I pay no attention to batting averages,” said Evers, “and no other sensible person pays much attention to them. They tell little of a player’s ability. Take my own case, for instance. I will talk freely about that for I know what I am talking about. If I were talking about someone else perhaps I would be guessing. In my own case I will say that I am convinced that I could usually have hit thirty points higher than I did hit, if I had made a specialty of hitting. Some lumbering bone head who does make a specialty of hitting and nothing else may forge well across the .300 line and everybody says ‘what a great batter!’ The facts of the case are the bone head may have been playing rotten baseball when he got that average and someone else who didn’t look to be in his class, might be the better hitter of the two.
“Jimmy Sheckard didn’t use to hit so very high, according to averages. But if you remember he used to get to first an awful lot of the time. He did this because he made a habit of waiting them out. He didn’t try to hit except when he was in a hole and was forced to do so. His whole system of play was based on another policy. He believed that a good share of the time he would be doing his club a better service by trying to wear down the opposing pitcher and get him in the hole all the time than he would be doing by hitting the ball. Of course, there are plenty of times when he there is nothing like the solid single. But there are plenty of other times when the player at the plate should focus his attention on trying to fool the pitcher and shouldn’t even try to hit unless he is in the hole. In my own case I have frequently faced the pitcher when I had no desire whatever to hit. I wanted to get a base on balls. That was what I was working for. If I didn’t get it my average suffered and if I did get it my average wasn’t benefited in the least. That is why I say the averages mean nothing . They don’t give a player credit for playing brainy ball. They put a premium on pure slugging.”
Evers indictment is a just one. The batting averages give scant justice to some of the brainiest players who ever lived. Eves himself was not a three hundred hitter in any true sense of he word. Occasionally, in his long career, he reached that mark. Once he soared away above it. But in the main he hit for many points less. Had he devoted his entire attention to hitting in so far as the manager would allow him to do so, there is not a question in the world that he would materially have bettered his mark. His own estimate of thirty points would seem a conservative one.
And yet, Evers, when he neglected to hit as a swell as he was able, was sacrificing his own personal record to the good of his club, was playing a far brainier brand of ball, in short, was batting in better form than he would have done had he constantly hit for .300. Is there not something wrong with a system which permits errors as grave as this?
Long associated with Evers was Edward Reulbach, a pitcher who the Trojan often claimed possessed a brain as shrewd and crafty as ever a pitcher owned. Reulbach, viewing the subject from another angle, the pitcher’s angle, said, “As a pitcher I would say that I would rather have a batter hit my offerings safely than to work me for a pass. I believe this would be the opinion of all other pitchers.” If a fast ball or curve is hit why it is only the fortunes of war. The pitcher grits his teeth and says, “I will bet they won’t hit the next one.” And he buckles down to work. But if after he has exhausted all his craft and skill, the pitcher is finally worked for a base on balls he experiences an entirely different feeling. He has been outguessed or he has temporarily lost control. If he has been “worked” his confidence to outguess the batter suffers a shock. If he has lost control he is strictly up against it. For control is everything to the pitcher. In any case he faces the next batter with much less confidence after he has passed a player than he would do had that man gained first base by a hit. The effect of a base on balls, in short, is more damaging to the pitcher’s nerve than is an ordinary hit.
Here are two players, one of the wisest pitchers who ever lived and one of the greatest all around stars who both agree as to the extreme desirability of the base on balls. Is there, then, no credit in the records for the man who is usually proficient at the act of getting passed?
We have seen how the base on balls was long ago recognized to the extent that a wholly exaggerated and fictitious value was given it. We have also seen that the value was later withdrawn and the pass thenceforth, utterly neglected. The cause of this neglect lay in the inherent difficulty in figuring the value of the pass. But is an attempt to discover this value foredoomed to failure?
If perfection is sought for the answer must be, “Yes, it is, impossible to determine the exact value of the base on balls.” But if the aim be merely an approximate value, (such things as form the ground work of all statistics) the answer is emphatically, “No, it is not impossible to approximate the value of the base on balls.”
In the two proceeding articles of this series the values of extra base hits were thoroughly discussed. Records of 1,000 hits made last summer indicated that a certain relationship exists between the hits which might be expressed by the following formula:
Suppose, for instance, that a home run should grade as 100%. Obviously, the greatest possible achievement the batter can attain, it should be so graded. On such a basis, then the triple would rank as 74.1%, the double as 50.6% and the single as 29.4%. In other words, the single would be worth 29.4% of a home run, or about three-tenths as valuable.
Now, while keeping tabs on 1,000 hits, records were also kept on bases on balls given during those games. They number 283.
Let us assume for the moment that these bases on balls were all earned precisely as hits are earned, either through the ingenuity of the batter or the pitcher’s respect for his batting powers. We might, then, readily apply precisely the same course which found for us the value of hits. The base on balls has three values. First, its value for the player who receives it. The pass enables him to begin his journey around the hassocks and advances him one-fourth of the distance to the required haven, home plate. The pass has also a secondary value in the influence it exerts towards advancing base runners already on the bases. And it has a third value through the instrumentality of the fielder’s choice. The player who receives the pass may be forced by the next man at second base but the batter who forced him may reach first safely on the play. He is, then, clearly indebted to the original occupant of that sack for his start in business.
It was these factors which determined the comparative values of singles, doubles, and the other extra base hits, in our previous articles. The basis of computation in every case, was the run. In other words, the comparative value of the hit depended upon its comparative influence in scoring runs. It was discovered through the process outlined above that a single was worth a little less than half a run, that a double was worth more than three-quarters of a run, a triple rather more than a run, and a homer at least a run and a half.
Pursuing the same course, we find that the three inherent values of the base on balls size up as follows:
Of the 283 persons who received free transportation in our statistics, 142 or just about half advanced to second base; 92 or rather less than one-third reached third base safely, while 64 or slightly less than one-quarter finally scored.
We find, on examining the statistics, that twenty players reach first on fielder’s choices, at the expense of a previous occupant who had received a free pass. Of these twenty dead heads only two finally scored, a rather low average but one which might have been expected, owing to the fact that at least one man, and very often two, were out when such a dead head got to first. The number of runs actually driven by the base on balls was relatively larger than we had supposed, though not in itself very great. Six runs were, according to our statistics, forced across the rubber by a base on balls.
Adding our three values together, we find that 283 passes netted the side which made them a total of 72 runs. Dividing 72 by 283 we find that the base on balls was, on the average, worth 25.4% of a run.
______________________
Of the 283 bases on balls examined
142 or 50.2% reached second base,
92 or 32.1% reached third base,
64 or 22.6% scored,
6 runs were forced in by passes,
2 runs were scored by players who
reached first on a fielder’s choice
at the expense of a passed player;
283 bases on balls netted 72 runs.
Dividing 72 by 283 we find that the
average value of a base on balls in terms
of runs is 25.4% of a run.
Employing a similar method we dis-
covered in previous articles in this series
the comparative values of all hits from
singles to home runs. Grouping these
values in order, allowing to the home run
as the most important of all, the standard
value of 100%, we find the following
general comparison:
Home run …………100.0%
Triple……………… 74.1%
Double…………….. 50.6%
Single……………… 29.4%
Base on balls………. 16.4% ___
We had previously discovered that a single was worth 45.7% of a run. Its greater value resulting from the vastly larger number of runs which were driven home by such a hit. Reverting to our former table and allowing to a home run the standard 100%, we find the following comparative values.3
The one defect in the above method of determining the comparative value of the base on balls is the assumption that it is always earned. Such an assumption is admittedly erroneous. Three causes and three alone contribute to a pass. It is given voluntarily to the batter as a tribute to his known ability as a slugger. It is earned by the batter’s ability to outguess the pitcher or to wait him out. Or it is the result of plain wildness on the pitcher’s part. In two of those three cases the batter has earned the pass. In one he has merely been lucky in being favored by the pitcher’s wildness.
To just what extent each one of these three contributing causes account for the total number of bases on balls issued in the major leagues it is impossible to say. But it is safe to assume that by far the most important of the three is the ability of the batter to outguess the pitcher or wait him out. Neither voluntary passes nor wildness account for so many passes. Obviously, more than half the passes given in the course of the year are earned and should be credited to the batter.
Perhaps it would be the part of wisdom to err on the side of generosity. The pass has long been neglected altogether. If we can not determine its value exactly let us at least not set that value at a lower mark than it deserves. Would it not be just, in the long run, to suppose that passes which are issued through sheer wildness are likely to affect the average of all batters in the same general degree?
Look at the matter as you will, the present system of ignoring the base on balls puts a decided premium on sheer blind slugging and discourages brainy inside baseball of the Evers type. Such a player as Jimmy Sheckard was playing the highest type of ball at the expense of his own personal record. For the policy of wait them out is most destructive to a batting average.
The base on balls should logically rank with the hit, though obviously on a much lower plane. The old scorers were wrong to call it the equal of a hit just as the present scorers are wrong in calling a single the equal of a home run. But the base on balls is worth something, and is usually earned by all round4 batting ability of a relatively high order. In light of present researches would it be far amiss to claim for the base on balls an offensive value half as great as we should allow a single?
Notes
1. It was actually 1887, but 1877 was in the original article. Lane later refers to the year correctly as 1887.
2. The original had “of” not “or.” I made the change.
3. The table was shown twice in the original article. Since it is directly above, I did not put it in a second time.
4. The original does read “round” and not “around.”
******
This was originally published in Baseball Magazine, March 1917.
Doesn't a lot of it sound like it could be talking about today?
In 18771 those potent intellects which govern baseball records decided to do something handsome for that orphan skill of the dope sheets, the base on balls. Swayed by the noble impulse of generosity they gave their benevolent feelings full sway and decided that henceforth a base on balls should be a hit, fully equal to a vicious triple or2 a fence crashing home run. There followed a frolicsome period for the batting kings, a period where the man who couldn’t bat three hundred was a chump, the four hundred hitter merely good, and the chief swatter of the bunch, Tip O’Neill, approached the fabulous mark of .500, a record which has never been equalled.
Alarmed by rocketing averages and finding that the dope was becoming fairly glutted the same potent intellects who had been responsible for this wild orgy of batting reversed their august decision and declared that a base on balls was of no account, generally worthless and henceforth even forever should not redound to the credit of the batter who was responsible for such free transportation to first base.
The magnates of that far distant date evidently had never heard of such a thing as a happy medium. The fact having gradually penetrated their well constructed skulls that a base on balls was worth something they immediately rushed in where angels feared to tread, and decreed that it should take rank with all the other hits, including the extra base wallop. Having discovered, in the course of time, that this act was rather rash they at once scrambled back to the zone of safety and refused to give the unfortunate base on balls any notice whatever. “Whole hog or none” was the noble slogan of the magnates of ’87. Having tried the “whole” they decreed the “none” and “none” it has been ever since.
The base on balls is indeed an outcast and a stranger in the records. The most the scorers do for the homeless wanderer is to ignore it utterly. The batter gets no credit for getting a base on balls either through his wits or through respect for his batting powers. But magnanimously, the fact that he is given a pass doesn’t react against him. He isn’t fined or anything like that. His voyage to first base merely doesn’t appear at all, isn’t called a time at bat, plays no part whatever either for or against his batting average.
“The easiest way” might be adopted as the motto in baseball. It was simpler to say a base on balls was valueless than to find out what its value was. The latter process involved some thought and work and usually those who have had the matter in charge have been unable to do the one an unwilling to do the other.
There may have been a time when wildness on the part of the pitcher was the main cause of a base on balls. But that date, if it ever existed, has gone forever. The requirements of the modern game demand almost perfect control. When Larry Cheney of the pennant winning Brooklyns was shunted from the Cubs he complained bitterly of this very policy. “It makes no difference how much stuff a pitcher has,” said Larry, “or how hard it is for the batters to hit him. If he gives a base on balls, yank him out of the box, and if he gives a number, fire him.”
“The strain of pitching nowadays is much greater than it was years ago,” said Dutch Leonard of the Champion Red Sox, “and it gets worse every year. I never saw the old timers pitch but I have looked into the records, and I know. Nowadays if a pitcher weakens to the extent of giving a base on balls the manager is right on his toes and if he pitches a few extra balls it is curtains for him. Pitchers don’t get knocked out of the box anymore. They don’t get a chance.”
In short, the whole progress of modern baseball has tended to eliminate wildness on the part of the pitcher. Wildness, to be sure, hasn’t entirely disappeared and never will. But it is a vanishing fraction, it grows less every year in the long run, and it has ceased to be the main factor in the base on balls.
In 1916, Grover Alexander, a pitcher who has good control, gave 50 base on balls. He took part in 48 games. How often is it good policy for a pitcher to pass a dangerous batter with men on bases? Alexander, redoubtable twirler that he is, would fear batsmen less than most but Alex is crafty and takes no unnecessary chances. No one knows how many times he passed a batter intentionally, but it wouldn’t be beyond reason to account for a large number of his fifty passes in this manner. Certainly if they could not thus be accounted for, the ability which certain batters possess of outguessing the pitcher or waiting him out, would well account for the balance. Alexander is human. Perhaps a few of his fifty passes were given through sheer wildness. But if so they were very, very, few.
Rudolph of Boston allowed 38 bases on balls in 41 contests. How many of them were due to wildness? No one knows, but certainly not many.
Turning to the batting lists we find that Tris Speaker received 82 bases on balls. If you want to know the reason look at his batting average. Ty Cobb received 78. Every one knows why. Eddie Collins got 86. Collins has a double toe hold on the base on balls column. He is known to be a good batter and he is also a past master in the art of waiting them out. A grand exponent of the wait ‘em out policy is Hooper, as every pitcher knows. Bert Shotton of the browns got 111 passes. Doesn’t he deserve any credit for this?
Some time ago John Evers, one of the brainiest stars who ever sat upon a players’ bench, had a heated discussion on the general subject of batting averages. “I pay no attention to batting averages,” said Evers, “and no other sensible person pays much attention to them. They tell little of a player’s ability. Take my own case, for instance. I will talk freely about that for I know what I am talking about. If I were talking about someone else perhaps I would be guessing. In my own case I will say that I am convinced that I could usually have hit thirty points higher than I did hit, if I had made a specialty of hitting. Some lumbering bone head who does make a specialty of hitting and nothing else may forge well across the .300 line and everybody says ‘what a great batter!’ The facts of the case are the bone head may have been playing rotten baseball when he got that average and someone else who didn’t look to be in his class, might be the better hitter of the two.
“Jimmy Sheckard didn’t use to hit so very high, according to averages. But if you remember he used to get to first an awful lot of the time. He did this because he made a habit of waiting them out. He didn’t try to hit except when he was in a hole and was forced to do so. His whole system of play was based on another policy. He believed that a good share of the time he would be doing his club a better service by trying to wear down the opposing pitcher and get him in the hole all the time than he would be doing by hitting the ball. Of course, there are plenty of times when he there is nothing like the solid single. But there are plenty of other times when the player at the plate should focus his attention on trying to fool the pitcher and shouldn’t even try to hit unless he is in the hole. In my own case I have frequently faced the pitcher when I had no desire whatever to hit. I wanted to get a base on balls. That was what I was working for. If I didn’t get it my average suffered and if I did get it my average wasn’t benefited in the least. That is why I say the averages mean nothing . They don’t give a player credit for playing brainy ball. They put a premium on pure slugging.”
Evers indictment is a just one. The batting averages give scant justice to some of the brainiest players who ever lived. Eves himself was not a three hundred hitter in any true sense of he word. Occasionally, in his long career, he reached that mark. Once he soared away above it. But in the main he hit for many points less. Had he devoted his entire attention to hitting in so far as the manager would allow him to do so, there is not a question in the world that he would materially have bettered his mark. His own estimate of thirty points would seem a conservative one.
And yet, Evers, when he neglected to hit as a swell as he was able, was sacrificing his own personal record to the good of his club, was playing a far brainier brand of ball, in short, was batting in better form than he would have done had he constantly hit for .300. Is there not something wrong with a system which permits errors as grave as this?
Long associated with Evers was Edward Reulbach, a pitcher who the Trojan often claimed possessed a brain as shrewd and crafty as ever a pitcher owned. Reulbach, viewing the subject from another angle, the pitcher’s angle, said, “As a pitcher I would say that I would rather have a batter hit my offerings safely than to work me for a pass. I believe this would be the opinion of all other pitchers.” If a fast ball or curve is hit why it is only the fortunes of war. The pitcher grits his teeth and says, “I will bet they won’t hit the next one.” And he buckles down to work. But if after he has exhausted all his craft and skill, the pitcher is finally worked for a base on balls he experiences an entirely different feeling. He has been outguessed or he has temporarily lost control. If he has been “worked” his confidence to outguess the batter suffers a shock. If he has lost control he is strictly up against it. For control is everything to the pitcher. In any case he faces the next batter with much less confidence after he has passed a player than he would do had that man gained first base by a hit. The effect of a base on balls, in short, is more damaging to the pitcher’s nerve than is an ordinary hit.
Here are two players, one of the wisest pitchers who ever lived and one of the greatest all around stars who both agree as to the extreme desirability of the base on balls. Is there, then, no credit in the records for the man who is usually proficient at the act of getting passed?
We have seen how the base on balls was long ago recognized to the extent that a wholly exaggerated and fictitious value was given it. We have also seen that the value was later withdrawn and the pass thenceforth, utterly neglected. The cause of this neglect lay in the inherent difficulty in figuring the value of the pass. But is an attempt to discover this value foredoomed to failure?
If perfection is sought for the answer must be, “Yes, it is, impossible to determine the exact value of the base on balls.” But if the aim be merely an approximate value, (such things as form the ground work of all statistics) the answer is emphatically, “No, it is not impossible to approximate the value of the base on balls.”
In the two proceeding articles of this series the values of extra base hits were thoroughly discussed. Records of 1,000 hits made last summer indicated that a certain relationship exists between the hits which might be expressed by the following formula:
Suppose, for instance, that a home run should grade as 100%. Obviously, the greatest possible achievement the batter can attain, it should be so graded. On such a basis, then the triple would rank as 74.1%, the double as 50.6% and the single as 29.4%. In other words, the single would be worth 29.4% of a home run, or about three-tenths as valuable.
Now, while keeping tabs on 1,000 hits, records were also kept on bases on balls given during those games. They number 283.
Let us assume for the moment that these bases on balls were all earned precisely as hits are earned, either through the ingenuity of the batter or the pitcher’s respect for his batting powers. We might, then, readily apply precisely the same course which found for us the value of hits. The base on balls has three values. First, its value for the player who receives it. The pass enables him to begin his journey around the hassocks and advances him one-fourth of the distance to the required haven, home plate. The pass has also a secondary value in the influence it exerts towards advancing base runners already on the bases. And it has a third value through the instrumentality of the fielder’s choice. The player who receives the pass may be forced by the next man at second base but the batter who forced him may reach first safely on the play. He is, then, clearly indebted to the original occupant of that sack for his start in business.
It was these factors which determined the comparative values of singles, doubles, and the other extra base hits, in our previous articles. The basis of computation in every case, was the run. In other words, the comparative value of the hit depended upon its comparative influence in scoring runs. It was discovered through the process outlined above that a single was worth a little less than half a run, that a double was worth more than three-quarters of a run, a triple rather more than a run, and a homer at least a run and a half.
Pursuing the same course, we find that the three inherent values of the base on balls size up as follows:
Of the 283 persons who received free transportation in our statistics, 142 or just about half advanced to second base; 92 or rather less than one-third reached third base safely, while 64 or slightly less than one-quarter finally scored.
We find, on examining the statistics, that twenty players reach first on fielder’s choices, at the expense of a previous occupant who had received a free pass. Of these twenty dead heads only two finally scored, a rather low average but one which might have been expected, owing to the fact that at least one man, and very often two, were out when such a dead head got to first. The number of runs actually driven by the base on balls was relatively larger than we had supposed, though not in itself very great. Six runs were, according to our statistics, forced across the rubber by a base on balls.
Adding our three values together, we find that 283 passes netted the side which made them a total of 72 runs. Dividing 72 by 283 we find that the base on balls was, on the average, worth 25.4% of a run.
______________________
Of the 283 bases on balls examined
142 or 50.2% reached second base,
92 or 32.1% reached third base,
64 or 22.6% scored,
6 runs were forced in by passes,
2 runs were scored by players who
reached first on a fielder’s choice
at the expense of a passed player;
283 bases on balls netted 72 runs.
Dividing 72 by 283 we find that the
average value of a base on balls in terms
of runs is 25.4% of a run.
Employing a similar method we dis-
covered in previous articles in this series
the comparative values of all hits from
singles to home runs. Grouping these
values in order, allowing to the home run
as the most important of all, the standard
value of 100%, we find the following
general comparison:
Home run …………100.0%
Triple……………… 74.1%
Double…………….. 50.6%
Single……………… 29.4%
Base on balls………. 16.4% ___
We had previously discovered that a single was worth 45.7% of a run. Its greater value resulting from the vastly larger number of runs which were driven home by such a hit. Reverting to our former table and allowing to a home run the standard 100%, we find the following comparative values.3
The one defect in the above method of determining the comparative value of the base on balls is the assumption that it is always earned. Such an assumption is admittedly erroneous. Three causes and three alone contribute to a pass. It is given voluntarily to the batter as a tribute to his known ability as a slugger. It is earned by the batter’s ability to outguess the pitcher or to wait him out. Or it is the result of plain wildness on the pitcher’s part. In two of those three cases the batter has earned the pass. In one he has merely been lucky in being favored by the pitcher’s wildness.
To just what extent each one of these three contributing causes account for the total number of bases on balls issued in the major leagues it is impossible to say. But it is safe to assume that by far the most important of the three is the ability of the batter to outguess the pitcher or wait him out. Neither voluntary passes nor wildness account for so many passes. Obviously, more than half the passes given in the course of the year are earned and should be credited to the batter.
Perhaps it would be the part of wisdom to err on the side of generosity. The pass has long been neglected altogether. If we can not determine its value exactly let us at least not set that value at a lower mark than it deserves. Would it not be just, in the long run, to suppose that passes which are issued through sheer wildness are likely to affect the average of all batters in the same general degree?
Look at the matter as you will, the present system of ignoring the base on balls puts a decided premium on sheer blind slugging and discourages brainy inside baseball of the Evers type. Such a player as Jimmy Sheckard was playing the highest type of ball at the expense of his own personal record. For the policy of wait them out is most destructive to a batting average.
The base on balls should logically rank with the hit, though obviously on a much lower plane. The old scorers were wrong to call it the equal of a hit just as the present scorers are wrong in calling a single the equal of a home run. But the base on balls is worth something, and is usually earned by all round4 batting ability of a relatively high order. In light of present researches would it be far amiss to claim for the base on balls an offensive value half as great as we should allow a single?
Notes
1. It was actually 1887, but 1877 was in the original article. Lane later refers to the year correctly as 1887.
2. The original had “of” not “or.” I made the change.
3. The table was shown twice in the original article. Since it is directly above, I did not put it in a second time.
4. The original does read “round” and not “around.”
******
This was originally published in Baseball Magazine, March 1917.
Doesn't a lot of it sound like it could be talking about today?
Wow
According to this :
NEW YORK -- The FBI is investigating allegations that a veteran NBA referee bet on basketball games over the past two seasons, including ones in which he officiated.
According to a law enforcement official, authorities are examining whether the referee made calls to affect the point spread in games on which he or associates had wagered.
The investigation first was reported Friday by the New York Post.
The law enforcement official, who spoke to the AP on Friday on condition of anonymity, said the referee was aware of the investigation and had made arrangements to surrender as early as next week to face charges. The official, who did not identify the referee, is familiar with the investigation but was not authorized to speak publicly about the ongoing investigation.
The law enforcement official said the bets involved thousands of dollars and were made on games during the 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 seasons.
In a statement issued Friday, the NBA said: "We have been asked by the FBI, with whom we are working closely, not to comment on this matter at this time."
The probe, which began recently, also involves allegations that the referee had connections to organized crime associates. Other arrests are expected, the official said.
The referee had a gambling problem, according to the official, and was approached by low-level mob associates through an acquaintance.
"These accusations, if true, are extremely serious and we have been in discussions with the NBA regarding this matter," Lamell McMorris, head of the NBA Referees Association, told Bloomberg News. "In light of the fact that this is an ongoing federal criminal investigation, we have nothing further to say at this time."
******
This would be as big as the Pete Rose gambling issue in baseball. The NBA has had a major problem with officials for a long time now. Everybody knows this, from the people in the stands to the people watching on tv to guys like Mark Cuban who actually can do something about it.
Refs tend to be very stubborn people. Almost by necessity, they have to think they are always right which can make attempts to scrutinize there calls risky. It is precisely because of things like this though it any league body has to take every possible measure to insure the sanctity/competitive balance of their games. Refs are people, they make mistakes, they can be bought. This has been a problem in NCAA basketball for years, refs being bought to change the point spreads/outcomes of games.
I hope David Stern will actually do the right thing, get to the bottom of this. Ruthlessly research every ref in the game...not just the one implicated in this FBI probe. If there's a hint, the smallest inkling of impropriety, fire them. This has the potential to be Kobe raping a white girl/brawl at Aurburn Hills/Spree choking Carlisimo together, times a million.
This could get messy...
NEW YORK -- The FBI is investigating allegations that a veteran NBA referee bet on basketball games over the past two seasons, including ones in which he officiated.
According to a law enforcement official, authorities are examining whether the referee made calls to affect the point spread in games on which he or associates had wagered.
The investigation first was reported Friday by the New York Post.
The law enforcement official, who spoke to the AP on Friday on condition of anonymity, said the referee was aware of the investigation and had made arrangements to surrender as early as next week to face charges. The official, who did not identify the referee, is familiar with the investigation but was not authorized to speak publicly about the ongoing investigation.
The law enforcement official said the bets involved thousands of dollars and were made on games during the 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 seasons.
In a statement issued Friday, the NBA said: "We have been asked by the FBI, with whom we are working closely, not to comment on this matter at this time."
The probe, which began recently, also involves allegations that the referee had connections to organized crime associates. Other arrests are expected, the official said.
The referee had a gambling problem, according to the official, and was approached by low-level mob associates through an acquaintance.
"These accusations, if true, are extremely serious and we have been in discussions with the NBA regarding this matter," Lamell McMorris, head of the NBA Referees Association, told Bloomberg News. "In light of the fact that this is an ongoing federal criminal investigation, we have nothing further to say at this time."
******
This would be as big as the Pete Rose gambling issue in baseball. The NBA has had a major problem with officials for a long time now. Everybody knows this, from the people in the stands to the people watching on tv to guys like Mark Cuban who actually can do something about it.
Refs tend to be very stubborn people. Almost by necessity, they have to think they are always right which can make attempts to scrutinize there calls risky. It is precisely because of things like this though it any league body has to take every possible measure to insure the sanctity/competitive balance of their games. Refs are people, they make mistakes, they can be bought. This has been a problem in NCAA basketball for years, refs being bought to change the point spreads/outcomes of games.
I hope David Stern will actually do the right thing, get to the bottom of this. Ruthlessly research every ref in the game...not just the one implicated in this FBI probe. If there's a hint, the smallest inkling of impropriety, fire them. This has the potential to be Kobe raping a white girl/brawl at Aurburn Hills/Spree choking Carlisimo together, times a million.
This could get messy...
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Clusterf*ck in Atlanta
"Mike, why can't you just shoot up a strip club like everyone else?" - Roger Goodell
"No, no, no. See Commish you don't understand....they're just dogs!" - Vick's attorney, Clinton Portis
I give like 5-2 odds that that actual sequence plays out. Nothing would surprise me about this case anymore. It's far and away the sickest thing happen in the NFL since Ray Carruth.
I have a few problems with the way the NFL is handling this right now, #1 is that they're not handling it at all! For some reason everyone is taking a wait and see approach, even though this has been hanging over their heads since before the draft. I seem to remember Pac-Man Jones being suspended before he was indited, shouldn't they move faster on a higher profile case? I understand wanting to let due process run it's course, but why only on this case and none others? If I'm Pac-Man's representatives I'm filing another appeal right now.
Chris Mortenson on ESPN, who I like and greatly respect, said that the NFL will go easier on Vick because he's a "first time offender" My response, "Um....what?" I seem to remember a bottle-gate fiasco a little while back. Is Vick going to get off for running/financing a major dog fighting ring just because he bribed an airport security official? Mort continued that while he has had other incidents, like the bottle and flipping off his home town crowd (stay classy Vick), those weren't criminal offenses. Well the bottle thing went away pretty damn quick, hence my assumption that he bribed someone either that or they let him go because he's MICHAEL FREAKING VICK and he's really really good on my Madden team, but there's also evidence like this (look in his left hand) that he's a pot head, and last time I checked that was still against the law.
That leads me to my next point, this whole investigation started with Vick's cousin getting busted for dealing dog fights are always, ALWAYS combined with two other things; drugs and gambling. Two things that any major sport wants to distance itself from as much as possible. I don't mean to say that to try and take away the horrific nature of dog fighting, only to add to the criminal element...and it's something that I think is being overlooked.
Atlanta should use this as an excuse to get rid of Vick, the only reason they had him on their team was because he was very popular and marketable. Here's something else that's been overlooked HE'S A REALLY BAD NFL QUARTERBACK! It would behoove the Falcons to get rid of Vick from a football point of view. Now it would behoove the Falcons to get rid of Vick from a public relations/moral point of view. So why is he still on the team, salary cap?
They should never have traded away Matt Shaub, they shouldn't have traded up in the draft to get Vick in the first place. All time one sided trade? Vick for LaDainian Tomlinson and Drew Brees! Maybe two hall of famers (if Brees has several more seasons like his last few) for a guy that's going to go down in history as one of the most reviled characters the NFL has ever seen.
P.S. -- How screwed up is the entire Vick family... I mean, isn't Marcus the good one now?
P.P.S -- I call Bad Newz Kennels for my fantasy football name!
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Sheffield
As I'm sure you all know, former Yankee Gary Sheffield criticized Yankee manager Joe Torre for his handling of African American players.
I didn't really want to write anything about this, but I think it goes well with Krevor's recent work and JJ and I talked about this the other day.
What I'm surprised about is not that Gary Sheffield said something polarizing and abrasive, not that 65 year old Italian guy from Brooklyn could be at least unintentionally racist, not that this turned into a big story during a really slow sports week...what I found surprising was the way the bulk of the media has handled the story.
With virtual accord members of the mass media have dealt with this story in one fashion...Gary Sheffield is just a loud race man (if I can use some 1950's lingo.)
I am not here to step in march with all those who immediately think Sheffield is wrong and Torre is a saint. Now I've always liked Joe Torre, he has a very good reputation. Is it possible that Torre treats different players differently, yes! I would say that it is almost a platitude.
Gary Sheffield was in that clubhouse far more often that I or any member of the media, Sheff dealt with Torre again far more often, so for anyone to automatically dismiss Sheffield's claims without any evidence (only we all really like Joe Torre and we don't like Gary Sheffield sentament) to the contrary I think it is simpleminded, irrational, and mildly rasict to not give Sheffield the benefit of the doubt.
If Michael Young came out and said the Ron Washington or Gary Pettis treated the black player differently, how would the story be different?
One more side note: Another thing that has really surprised me about this is the fact that a lot of people try to say that Derek Jeter is black. Derek Jeter is not black. That is about as simply as I can put it. Sheff is right.
Yes Jeter's father is African American, but #2 is in no way culturally black.
Derek grew up in Pequannock Township, New Jersey... a town with a median family income of $84,487. The racial makeup of the township was 96.60% White, 0.30% African American, 0.12% Native American, 1.91% Asian, 0.50% from other races, and 0.58% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 2.94% of the population. (thanks wikipedia!)
In fairness, Jeter is more African American (50%) than the average person from his hometown (0.12%) On Census data Jeter can punch the African American chad....(not to be confused with this) but he is not black. Jeter grew up white. In a rich white town, with rich white friends. He has nothing in common with the black culture in America, nor the traditional inner-city environment. Do you have to be from the poor inner-city to be black? No. But you can't grow up in an affluent white town, only associating with rich white kids, with a white parent and be accepted into the mainstream black culture.
I didn't really want to write anything about this, but I think it goes well with Krevor's recent work and JJ and I talked about this the other day.
What I'm surprised about is not that Gary Sheffield said something polarizing and abrasive, not that 65 year old Italian guy from Brooklyn could be at least unintentionally racist, not that this turned into a big story during a really slow sports week...what I found surprising was the way the bulk of the media has handled the story.
With virtual accord members of the mass media have dealt with this story in one fashion...Gary Sheffield is just a loud race man (if I can use some 1950's lingo.)
I am not here to step in march with all those who immediately think Sheffield is wrong and Torre is a saint. Now I've always liked Joe Torre, he has a very good reputation. Is it possible that Torre treats different players differently, yes! I would say that it is almost a platitude.
Gary Sheffield was in that clubhouse far more often that I or any member of the media, Sheff dealt with Torre again far more often, so for anyone to automatically dismiss Sheffield's claims without any evidence (only we all really like Joe Torre and we don't like Gary Sheffield sentament) to the contrary I think it is simpleminded, irrational, and mildly rasict to not give Sheffield the benefit of the doubt.
If Michael Young came out and said the Ron Washington or Gary Pettis treated the black player differently, how would the story be different?
One more side note: Another thing that has really surprised me about this is the fact that a lot of people try to say that Derek Jeter is black. Derek Jeter is not black. That is about as simply as I can put it. Sheff is right.
Yes Jeter's father is African American, but #2 is in no way culturally black.
Derek grew up in Pequannock Township, New Jersey... a town with a median family income of $84,487. The racial makeup of the township was 96.60% White, 0.30% African American, 0.12% Native American, 1.91% Asian, 0.50% from other races, and 0.58% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 2.94% of the population. (thanks wikipedia!)
In fairness, Jeter is more African American (50%) than the average person from his hometown (0.12%) On Census data Jeter can punch the African American chad....(not to be confused with this) but he is not black. Jeter grew up white. In a rich white town, with rich white friends. He has nothing in common with the black culture in America, nor the traditional inner-city environment. Do you have to be from the poor inner-city to be black? No. But you can't grow up in an affluent white town, only associating with rich white kids, with a white parent and be accepted into the mainstream black culture.
Monday, July 16, 2007
Trade Season Begins
Gentlemen, let's the games begin. Hi-oh!!
ESPN.com is now proclaiming that "Cubs acquire former All-Star catcher Kendall"...emphasis on former.
The Marc Cubans get Jason Kendall for Rob Bowen and AA pitcher Jerry Blevins. This trade further illustrates the greatness of Billy Beane. He trades Kendall, who's making an unbelievably obscene 13.4 million this season, for a guy who's a better player!!! Neither Bowen nor Kendall is any great shakes, but the one thing Kendall has always done really well is draw walks...but Bowen has a much higher on-base percentage! .261 to .316!
Kendall formerly was a really good player...but virtually all the skills that he once possessed have eroded, which one would expect for a man with over 1500 games caught at the big league level. His bat speed, foot speed, power, arm strength have all left. Jason Kendall is a bad baseball player at this point in his career and he's paid like a superstar, and somehow Billy Beane convinced the Cubbies that it was 1998.
The minor league pitcher that was just a throw in, happens to have 174K's in 148IP in the minors...he's a legit prospect.
ESPN.com is now proclaiming that "Cubs acquire former All-Star catcher Kendall"...emphasis on former.
The Marc Cubans get Jason Kendall for Rob Bowen and AA pitcher Jerry Blevins. This trade further illustrates the greatness of Billy Beane. He trades Kendall, who's making an unbelievably obscene 13.4 million this season, for a guy who's a better player!!! Neither Bowen nor Kendall is any great shakes, but the one thing Kendall has always done really well is draw walks...but Bowen has a much higher on-base percentage! .261 to .316!
Kendall formerly was a really good player...but virtually all the skills that he once possessed have eroded, which one would expect for a man with over 1500 games caught at the big league level. His bat speed, foot speed, power, arm strength have all left. Jason Kendall is a bad baseball player at this point in his career and he's paid like a superstar, and somehow Billy Beane convinced the Cubbies that it was 1998.
The minor league pitcher that was just a throw in, happens to have 174K's in 148IP in the minors...he's a legit prospect.
Crazy Athlete of the Week! (Kinda)
By BrianThis week the award for the craziest athlete will actually go to one who hasn't done anything truly crazy this week, however is involved in a situation so ironic its crazy.
Ron Artest was suspended for the first seven games of next season which may not surprise many of you. After all he was the instigator in the famous brawl at the Palace of Auburn Hills and pleaded no contest to domestic violence charges on March 5th. However this situation is very ironic due to the fact that Artest took a while to respond to the suspension because he was doing humanitarian work in Kenya. Artest joined other NBA players to interact with AIDS babies in African and distribute rice to those in need. And if you think this is a one time publicity stunt consider this, Artest has bought a house there so he can return and continue his charitable work every offseason. Could it be someone that we all prejudged has another side to him? Apparently he does have another side and it is worth noting.
Artest is often vilified for being a no good thug, which many people believe is all too common in the NBA. The NBA issued harsh suspensions for misconduct and implemented a dress code to try and improve its image. The NBA started doing this long before Roger Godell set out to clean up the NFL's image which has taken hits for many athletes being crazy which we have been tracking for several weeks.
Exposing athletes acting stupid is the reason for crazy athlete of the week. We think it is important and often funny to point out the insane behavior of certain athletes who go way too far. However there are two sides to every story. Artest has done a lot of good things and the negatives in his life have been overblown. The fight at Auburn Hills was a nasty event but really began due to a thug fan trying to start a fight. Billy Beane beat up an asshole fan at a minor league game when he was a player, which is why you don't try and fight professional athletes. Ty Cobb was suspended for a month because he went up into the stands and punched a guy in a wheel chair. These incidents had very different consequences for those involved.
The reason the NBA came down so harsh on these players is that the white owners, sponsors, and season ticket holders got upset over certain events and decided to crack down. It happened in the NBA first because of pure racism. The NBA is mostly black and players don't wear helmets like in football...you can still see them through headbands. You can clearly see the players and this individual recognition, of both who they are and their race, leads to more scrutiny. Domestic violence is obviously wrong and the suspension is probably justified but before we go and vilify a player like Artest we should see what else they are doing with their lives and look at ourselves and ask some questions. What have we done for those less fortunate lately? Would we be angry about a hockey player getting into a fight on the ice? Would we be mad about a baseball player throwing a ball at someones head, or charging the mound? And finally would we be as upset if Ron Artest was white? Would the NBA take such drastic measures if the players were mostly white?
Feel free to comment...
Sunday, July 15, 2007
No Astericks Necessary
On our trip thru the great state of Missouri, JJ and I rehashed an old argument; Baseball players of yesteryear are being removed from the record books by modern players who play more games, in smaller parks, with better equipment... JJ believes that there should be two record books, I do not. What actually got us started on this was not Ruth v Bonds, it was George Sisler v Ichiro on the all time single season hit record... yes we debate these things, we are true SportsBullies!
I planned on writing a column centering around the fact that due to the great baseball era we now live in, where so much information is out and freely accessible to everyone, we can use All-Time Translations of statistics from any single season or career and compare them. This reasoning also holds for the whole "steroids era" which contends that the numbers of current sluggers are inflated thus making it impossible to compare with the greats of the by gone eras.
I had this whole article planned out in my head, I was going to use BaseballProspectus.com's Davenport Translations to get a new leaderboard, a new record book...one sans astericks.
But Will Carroll and Clay Davenport beat me to it...
******
July 15, 2007
The Answer
No Asterisks Necessary
by Will Carroll and Clay Davenport
You're going to have to pick your poison here, old-timers. You can either hate Barry Bonds, or you can hate statheads, but when it comes to solving the "problem" of the all-time home run title, you can't have it both ways. Those that want to place an asterisk on Bonds' achievements have always focused on the question of whether or not he's been cheating, something that remains unproven in the legal if not literal sense. In that argument, you can never win, not until Bonds pumps out a positive steroid test, something that seems pretty unlikely at this late stage of his career. Instead, if you really want to make your point sans the Frickian asterisk, you're going to have to rely on that other thing that baseball purists hate: math.
Over and over, people always bring up that we can't compare Babe Ruth or Hank Aaron to Barry Bonds. To that, we say "nuts." Because we most certainly can. There's some question as to how physical skills might translate, but it's easy enough to translate statistics to adjust for park, league, and era. In fact, it's one of the bedrocks of Baseball Prospectus. Since before its founding, Clay has been making translations available. Translations of player performance aren't that complex on the surface and are easily read, just like a normal stat line. It's behind the scenes where it gets complex, and why Davenport Translations have never been seriously contested. Unlike attempts at the "One True Stat" like VORP, or Runs Created, or WARP, or Win Shares, all with their various degrees success or failure, translations seldom raise any significant argument among serious statheads, and no one has developed a competing system.
What goes into a translation? According to the BP Glossary, a single-season translation involves adjustments "made to account for the home park and for the offensive level of the league as a whole. Hitters have an adjustment for not having to face their own team's pitchers; pitchers have a similar adjustment for not having to face their own hitters. Hitters in the AL since 1973 have a disadvantage in these statistics, since the league average is artificially inflated by the use of the DH and no adjustment is made for that." This is of no concern, since Ruth and Aaron played before the DH era, and Bonds spent his career in the National League. (We know, we're not mentioning those few occasions that he DH'd in interleague play. The statheads are already riled up.)
To get to an all-time translation, you have to go a bit further. "Statistics that have been adjusted for all-time have all of the adjustments for a single season, plus two more. One adjustment normalizes the average fielding numbers over time. Historically, the fielding share of total defense has been diminishing with time—more walks, more strikeouts, and more home runs means less work for fielders. In the single-season adjustments, fielders from before WWII have a lot more value (to their teams) than fielders do today; the all-time adjustments have attempted to remove that temporal trend. The second adjustment is for league difficulty. League quality has generally increased with time. Each league has been rated for difficulty and compared to a trend line defined by the post-integration National League. In addition to the adjustments for season, an adjustment is made for league difficulty."
So once the heavy lifting is done, we're left with statistics that are on a level playing field. It's as if all the players that ever played the game did it at the same time in the same stadium against the same competition. Where is that stadium you ask? The most neutral stadium in the year used, 2000, happens to be Montreal's Stade Olympique, so in some small way, baseball in that fine city lives on. It's the ultimate simulation, calculated in a manner similar to the method economists use with 1973 dollars to calculate inflation. And what does this mean for those of you asteriskers? First, it means we can abandon the number "755" as some sort of ultimate achievement. That number's only good enough for ninth place on the Davenport Translation All-Time Home Run list—and it's Mike Schmidt that hits that number exactly in the translations.
Babe Ruth 1070
Hank Aaron 971
Barry Bonds 931
Mel Ott 861
Willie Mays 856
Lou Gehrig 792
Jimmie Foxx 765
Reggie Jackson 757
Mike Schmidt 755
Ted Williams 752
That makes for a pretty nice list. It passes the "looks right test," in that most of the all-time greats are here, with Ruth and Aaron atop it, and with Mays and Gehrig in historically significant positions. It removes Sammy Sosa and Mark McGwire from the list while inserting Ted Williams. Mel Ott makes for a nice conversation-starter. Reggie Jackson and his connections to Curtis Wentzlaff aside, it acknowledges Barry Bonds on the list without giving him any sort of primacy. All in all, it's a good asterisk-free list that should appeal to all. Even Bonds' most ardent defenders can't argue that he's not being rewarded with a number of homers lost to cavernous AT&T Park and the winds of Candlestick—just not enough to put him above Ruth or Aaron. At least not yet; Bonds would need roughly 30 more home runs, most at home, to pass Aaron on the translated list.
If you're wondering about other major leagues, Sadaharu Oh is not your man. The level of play in the Japanese league is translateable too, but down, due to its level, which is somewhere between the Major Leagues and Triple-A. That leaves him with a rough estimate of 505 career translated homers for the purposes of this exercise.
Is there anyone else currently in the game who has a chance to edge onto the list? Let's contribute to the current lovefest for Ken Griffey Jr. Here's the current active list:
Barry Bonds 931
Ken Griffey Jr. 719
Sammy Sosa 684
Frank Thomas 628
Alex Rodriguez 576
Gary Sheffield 576
Manny Ramirez 565
Jim Thome 559
Carlos Delgado 501
Mike Piazza 469
Griffey is almost certain to edge onto the top ten all-time list, depending on how long the Indian summer of his career lasts. Going as high as sixth is quite possible, especially if we take for his own the career of his father, a player who kept value into his forties. Alex Rodriguez, to be sure, is noticeable on this list, coming up to almost 600 translated home runs at the same time that he's pushing the 500 mark in reality; at 32, Rodriguez should bash his way into the translated career top ten in the next two years and then will begin to creep up the list. It's notable that A-Rod leaving Yankee Stadium for his home games might actually hurt his chances at the translated career title. That's because park effects are a big part of translating performance, and help the numbers of those players who have to hit in pitcher's parks. Once again, this is a list that looks good. It should be no surprise to see any of these names, and it matches up well with what most fans would expect.
So if we've solved the 755 problem, what then of the 73 issue? The easy answer might be Alex Rodriguez, currently on pace for a translated 70. Bonds' 2001 translates to 72; all the math essentially cancels itself out for Bonds' 2001, and actually costs him one home run. I hear the asteriskers cheering. But who's in the translated 70 home run club? Here's that list:
Babe Ruth, 1927 75
Babe Ruth, 1920 74
Babe Ruth, 1921 73
Babe Ruth, 1924 73
Babe Ruth, 1928 73
Barry Bonds, 2001 72
Mark McGwire, 1998 72
Jimmie Foxx, 1932 70
Babe Ruth, 1923 70
Babe Ruth, 1926 70
Alex Rodriguez, 2007 70
Once again, we get a list that passes the "looks right" test. Ruth has seven—seven!—seasons of 70 or more, while Bonds and McGwire's so-called tainted seasons fall in the middle. Jimmie Foxx gets to be the guy we all shrug our shoulders on, a forgotten great to most fans, while Alex Rodriguez makes the list with his "on pace for" number this season. Rodriguez will have to keep up the same pace to stay on the list, but we added it here for entertainment purposes.
But there's more. There's one player with two seasons we've purposefully left off the list of the Seventies Club. That one player is one that might surprise you, not for having two of the great slugging seasons of all time, but for having the single greatest slugging season of all time. That's right, it's not Ruth at the top of the list. The translated 70 home run club has another member, its king:
Lou Gehrig, 1927 76
Lou Gehrig, 1934 71
There's no asterisks flitting around Gehrig's career, but that amazing 1927 season is pretty
surprising and caused me (Will) to ask me (Clay) to check the math. Remember, Ruth hit 60 real home runs to Gehrig's real 47. Dutiful double-checking confirms that while Ruth had a 60-47 edge on Gehrig in real life, Gehrig had an 18-8 lead in triples, and a 52-29 lead in doubles, and when you translate from before World War II to the modern era, a lot of doubles and triples get turned into home runs, enough for the Iron Horse to pass the Babe in this case. Gehrig got those hits because he had power, not speed, and in today's game that power would translate over the fence.
So, there you have it, the problem is solved. We've wiped Barry Bonds off the top of both the all-time and single-season home run lists, restoring balance to the universe and aligning the stars in a neutral fashion. Any taint of the steroid era is shifted down (as many argue it should be), although it's through the context of the era rather than any unproven allegations and guesses over what PEDs do to player performance. Perhaps that's just as well. Performance-enhancing drugs may have been in the game of baseball and its Hall of Fame since the Age of Spalding, from Pud Galvin's elixir of bull testicles—a primitive testosterone that may have led to his death—on down to Willie Mays, Henry Aaron, and Mike Schmidt's use of stimulants, and who wants to get into that? Instead, it's time to take the translations into account, and play the game on the most even of fields. Purists of the world, no thanks are necessary.
******
That's the article I wanted to write, but I'll give them props... and for the record JJ, here's George Sisler v Ichiro!
Sisler's 1920 season actual stats:
257 Hits 631 AB's
Ichiro 2004 season actual:
262 Hits 704 AB's
Sisler's 1920 season translated stats:
231 Hits 637 AB's
Ichiro 2004 translated:
267 Hits 677AB's
Ichiro! Still Champ!!
I planned on writing a column centering around the fact that due to the great baseball era we now live in, where so much information is out and freely accessible to everyone, we can use All-Time Translations of statistics from any single season or career and compare them. This reasoning also holds for the whole "steroids era" which contends that the numbers of current sluggers are inflated thus making it impossible to compare with the greats of the by gone eras.
I had this whole article planned out in my head, I was going to use BaseballProspectus.com's Davenport Translations to get a new leaderboard, a new record book...one sans astericks.
But Will Carroll and Clay Davenport beat me to it...
******
July 15, 2007
The Answer
No Asterisks Necessary
by Will Carroll and Clay Davenport
You're going to have to pick your poison here, old-timers. You can either hate Barry Bonds, or you can hate statheads, but when it comes to solving the "problem" of the all-time home run title, you can't have it both ways. Those that want to place an asterisk on Bonds' achievements have always focused on the question of whether or not he's been cheating, something that remains unproven in the legal if not literal sense. In that argument, you can never win, not until Bonds pumps out a positive steroid test, something that seems pretty unlikely at this late stage of his career. Instead, if you really want to make your point sans the Frickian asterisk, you're going to have to rely on that other thing that baseball purists hate: math.
Over and over, people always bring up that we can't compare Babe Ruth or Hank Aaron to Barry Bonds. To that, we say "nuts." Because we most certainly can. There's some question as to how physical skills might translate, but it's easy enough to translate statistics to adjust for park, league, and era. In fact, it's one of the bedrocks of Baseball Prospectus. Since before its founding, Clay has been making translations available. Translations of player performance aren't that complex on the surface and are easily read, just like a normal stat line. It's behind the scenes where it gets complex, and why Davenport Translations have never been seriously contested. Unlike attempts at the "One True Stat" like VORP, or Runs Created, or WARP, or Win Shares, all with their various degrees success or failure, translations seldom raise any significant argument among serious statheads, and no one has developed a competing system.
What goes into a translation? According to the BP Glossary, a single-season translation involves adjustments "made to account for the home park and for the offensive level of the league as a whole. Hitters have an adjustment for not having to face their own team's pitchers; pitchers have a similar adjustment for not having to face their own hitters. Hitters in the AL since 1973 have a disadvantage in these statistics, since the league average is artificially inflated by the use of the DH and no adjustment is made for that." This is of no concern, since Ruth and Aaron played before the DH era, and Bonds spent his career in the National League. (We know, we're not mentioning those few occasions that he DH'd in interleague play. The statheads are already riled up.)
To get to an all-time translation, you have to go a bit further. "Statistics that have been adjusted for all-time have all of the adjustments for a single season, plus two more. One adjustment normalizes the average fielding numbers over time. Historically, the fielding share of total defense has been diminishing with time—more walks, more strikeouts, and more home runs means less work for fielders. In the single-season adjustments, fielders from before WWII have a lot more value (to their teams) than fielders do today; the all-time adjustments have attempted to remove that temporal trend. The second adjustment is for league difficulty. League quality has generally increased with time. Each league has been rated for difficulty and compared to a trend line defined by the post-integration National League. In addition to the adjustments for season, an adjustment is made for league difficulty."
So once the heavy lifting is done, we're left with statistics that are on a level playing field. It's as if all the players that ever played the game did it at the same time in the same stadium against the same competition. Where is that stadium you ask? The most neutral stadium in the year used, 2000, happens to be Montreal's Stade Olympique, so in some small way, baseball in that fine city lives on. It's the ultimate simulation, calculated in a manner similar to the method economists use with 1973 dollars to calculate inflation. And what does this mean for those of you asteriskers? First, it means we can abandon the number "755" as some sort of ultimate achievement. That number's only good enough for ninth place on the Davenport Translation All-Time Home Run list—and it's Mike Schmidt that hits that number exactly in the translations.
Babe Ruth 1070
Hank Aaron 971
Barry Bonds 931
Mel Ott 861
Willie Mays 856
Lou Gehrig 792
Jimmie Foxx 765
Reggie Jackson 757
Mike Schmidt 755
Ted Williams 752
That makes for a pretty nice list. It passes the "looks right test," in that most of the all-time greats are here, with Ruth and Aaron atop it, and with Mays and Gehrig in historically significant positions. It removes Sammy Sosa and Mark McGwire from the list while inserting Ted Williams. Mel Ott makes for a nice conversation-starter. Reggie Jackson and his connections to Curtis Wentzlaff aside, it acknowledges Barry Bonds on the list without giving him any sort of primacy. All in all, it's a good asterisk-free list that should appeal to all. Even Bonds' most ardent defenders can't argue that he's not being rewarded with a number of homers lost to cavernous AT&T Park and the winds of Candlestick—just not enough to put him above Ruth or Aaron. At least not yet; Bonds would need roughly 30 more home runs, most at home, to pass Aaron on the translated list.
If you're wondering about other major leagues, Sadaharu Oh is not your man. The level of play in the Japanese league is translateable too, but down, due to its level, which is somewhere between the Major Leagues and Triple-A. That leaves him with a rough estimate of 505 career translated homers for the purposes of this exercise.
Is there anyone else currently in the game who has a chance to edge onto the list? Let's contribute to the current lovefest for Ken Griffey Jr. Here's the current active list:
Barry Bonds 931
Ken Griffey Jr. 719
Sammy Sosa 684
Frank Thomas 628
Alex Rodriguez 576
Gary Sheffield 576
Manny Ramirez 565
Jim Thome 559
Carlos Delgado 501
Mike Piazza 469
Griffey is almost certain to edge onto the top ten all-time list, depending on how long the Indian summer of his career lasts. Going as high as sixth is quite possible, especially if we take for his own the career of his father, a player who kept value into his forties. Alex Rodriguez, to be sure, is noticeable on this list, coming up to almost 600 translated home runs at the same time that he's pushing the 500 mark in reality; at 32, Rodriguez should bash his way into the translated career top ten in the next two years and then will begin to creep up the list. It's notable that A-Rod leaving Yankee Stadium for his home games might actually hurt his chances at the translated career title. That's because park effects are a big part of translating performance, and help the numbers of those players who have to hit in pitcher's parks. Once again, this is a list that looks good. It should be no surprise to see any of these names, and it matches up well with what most fans would expect.
So if we've solved the 755 problem, what then of the 73 issue? The easy answer might be Alex Rodriguez, currently on pace for a translated 70. Bonds' 2001 translates to 72; all the math essentially cancels itself out for Bonds' 2001, and actually costs him one home run. I hear the asteriskers cheering. But who's in the translated 70 home run club? Here's that list:
Babe Ruth, 1927 75
Babe Ruth, 1920 74
Babe Ruth, 1921 73
Babe Ruth, 1924 73
Babe Ruth, 1928 73
Barry Bonds, 2001 72
Mark McGwire, 1998 72
Jimmie Foxx, 1932 70
Babe Ruth, 1923 70
Babe Ruth, 1926 70
Alex Rodriguez, 2007 70
Once again, we get a list that passes the "looks right" test. Ruth has seven—seven!—seasons of 70 or more, while Bonds and McGwire's so-called tainted seasons fall in the middle. Jimmie Foxx gets to be the guy we all shrug our shoulders on, a forgotten great to most fans, while Alex Rodriguez makes the list with his "on pace for" number this season. Rodriguez will have to keep up the same pace to stay on the list, but we added it here for entertainment purposes.
But there's more. There's one player with two seasons we've purposefully left off the list of the Seventies Club. That one player is one that might surprise you, not for having two of the great slugging seasons of all time, but for having the single greatest slugging season of all time. That's right, it's not Ruth at the top of the list. The translated 70 home run club has another member, its king:
Lou Gehrig, 1927 76
Lou Gehrig, 1934 71
There's no asterisks flitting around Gehrig's career, but that amazing 1927 season is pretty
surprising and caused me (Will) to ask me (Clay) to check the math. Remember, Ruth hit 60 real home runs to Gehrig's real 47. Dutiful double-checking confirms that while Ruth had a 60-47 edge on Gehrig in real life, Gehrig had an 18-8 lead in triples, and a 52-29 lead in doubles, and when you translate from before World War II to the modern era, a lot of doubles and triples get turned into home runs, enough for the Iron Horse to pass the Babe in this case. Gehrig got those hits because he had power, not speed, and in today's game that power would translate over the fence.
So, there you have it, the problem is solved. We've wiped Barry Bonds off the top of both the all-time and single-season home run lists, restoring balance to the universe and aligning the stars in a neutral fashion. Any taint of the steroid era is shifted down (as many argue it should be), although it's through the context of the era rather than any unproven allegations and guesses over what PEDs do to player performance. Perhaps that's just as well. Performance-enhancing drugs may have been in the game of baseball and its Hall of Fame since the Age of Spalding, from Pud Galvin's elixir of bull testicles—a primitive testosterone that may have led to his death—on down to Willie Mays, Henry Aaron, and Mike Schmidt's use of stimulants, and who wants to get into that? Instead, it's time to take the translations into account, and play the game on the most even of fields. Purists of the world, no thanks are necessary.
******
That's the article I wanted to write, but I'll give them props... and for the record JJ, here's George Sisler v Ichiro!
Sisler's 1920 season actual stats:
257 Hits 631 AB's
Ichiro 2004 season actual:
262 Hits 704 AB's
Sisler's 1920 season translated stats:
231 Hits 637 AB's
Ichiro 2004 translated:
267 Hits 677AB's
Ichiro! Still Champ!!
Friday, July 13, 2007
Ranger Trades
I've been thinking about this a lot recently. Don't look at their streak leading up to the All-Star break, even with that streak their over a dozen games out and still in last place in the division. This team needs to sell off the few useful parts it actually has. Sammy and Lofton should be giving away for a bag of magic beans. Millwood should be held onto until right at the deadline, hopefully he has a few good outings between now and then...he'll prolly be the best starter available at the deadline.
In this column I'll focus on realistic trades possibilities for Gagne, Aki, and Big Tex. Since you're not going to get Philip Hughes or Andrew Miller/Cameron Maybin, I recommend trading each guy separately and loading up on undervalued guys, pre arbitration eligible guys who can start next year, and really young guys with upside.
Eric Gagne to Cleveland for OF Shin-Soo Choo and C Maximiliano Ramirez
Besides setting the record for coolest names ever in a trade, I think this deal makes sense for both teams. Texas gets a guy who can step in a play right now, Choo, and a young guy with a lot of upside, Maximiliano, while Cle gets bullpen help they so desperately need.
Shin-Soo Choo may not be a name that is widely known to Ranger fans but he does some things very well; he gets on base, runs well, and catches the ball. The 24 year old Korean can play each of the outfield spots as well at DH and would step right into the Texas' lineup. Choo is a victim of a numbers crunch in Cleveland as Trot Nixon, David Delluci, Jason Michaels, Casey Blake, Grady Sizemore, and Travis Hafner are all blocking his way to the show. Due to injuries he got some playing time last year, and in about a month and a half of work he hit .295/.373/.473 for the Tribe. Those numbers look shockingly similar to his career minor league totals, .303/.393/.464. He may not get a lot better as he goes on, but he's good enough to play everyday in the majors right now.
Max Ramirez is the next in line of young Latin catchers. Ramirez was on the World Roster for the Futures Game, but did not play. He has a very strong arm and walks a lot...two things I like from my catchers. He does strike out a lot, but he has yet to post an OBP under .408 in any of his minor league stops. He's far away from being big league ready, but with Victor Martinez entrenched at the 2 spot I wouldn't be shocked if the Indians moved him for big league help, especially a legit closer like Gagne.
Cleveland was the other big competitor for Gagne's services this offseason, and it would stand to reason that after the great first half he's had they still have a lot of interest in him. The Indians should be the team that is the best fit for Gagne; in a pennant race, in that race with another team that needs bullpen help, stats oriented organization, lots of young talent. Trading a guy who can't get in their lineup and a wet behind the ears backstop isn't too much to ask. But since he's going to be a free agent after this year and is still an injury risk don't expect the moon in return. Choo would start for us and Ramirez would be one of our top 10 prospects, not a bad haul.
Akinora Otsuka and Joaquin Arias to the New York Mets for CF Lastings Milledge
Omar Minaya and the rest of the Metropolitans brass have been down on Lastings for awhile...seemingly upset that he hasn't had instant success in the majors and the dreaded but very vague "attitude problems" have been associated with him, as well. However, Omar can lose sight of the big picture and overpay for immediate gratification especially for a big name. While Aki isn't a big name...Gagne maybe if you could switch these two trades...but he fills a very important hole; late relief. Getting to Billy Wagner has been a bit of a problem this year, and if he goes down...not completely unforeseen for a 35+ year old player...NYM has no alternatives. Aki gives them a proven 8th inning guy who can also close. Two big reasons I think Aki is more likely for this deal;
1) He's still under club control for 2 more seasons, so whomever acquires him will have him for much longer than Gagne.
2) Gagne has control of where he goes, and because his contract includes financial incentives based on numbers of games finished it's unlikely that he'll agree to be traded somewhere where he wouldn't be the closer.
I'm not a fan of Arias, but I think Minaya might be. He covets toolsy Latin players and Arias is nothing if that. Reyes at short would block Joaquin, but the Mets are in desparte need of a second basemen...Reyes and Arias up the middle would cover insane amounts of ground.
Milledge is the type of young, very talented, pre-arb eligible, undervalued player Texas should target. As a 21 year old in the International League (a notorious pitchers league) he's hitting .277/.388/.440 for AAA Norfolk. For a young hitter, he has very developed abilities to go the other way and a keen batting eye...drawing walks in 14% of his plate appearances this year. Scouts have long raved about his tools, his Soriano like quick bat and footspeed made him a first round pick out of high school in '03.
Somewhat similar to Choo in Cleveland, Milledge faces the outfield logjam with Carlos Beltran, Shawn Green, Moises Alou with the big club and young studs Carlos Gomez and Fernando Martinez going to be ready for the bigs soon, Milledge seems like the odd man out even though he'll be a good player with a real shot of being a superstar. Milledge was called up the other day, but I really think it's for more of a showcase to other teams than anything.
I thought going into this year the the Mets would try and move Milledge for a starter, but with the way John Maine and Oliver Perez have steppped up that need seems to have been largely filled from within. They may still want a starter in return, so I'd see if Millwood or Padilla or Volquez have any appeal to them. Bottom line is that there is a deal to be made here, the Mets are willing to part with Milledge and getting a top-notch set up man who can close who and will still be yours for 2 years after this AND a young athletic uber toolsy minor leaguer is a fair price.
Mark Teixeira to Atlanta for LHP Matt Harrison, SS Chase Fontaine, and RHP Jamie Richmond
The big one, you've all been waiting for...not what you were hoping for? Me neither...but I think it's about as good as it'g going to get. Atlanta is in a playoff race (shock!) and they have a big need for a power hitting first baseman. Not making the playoffs last year could give GM John Schurholtz the extra encentive to get a big deal done, even if it means parting with a guy like Matt Harrison.
I was a big proponent of trading Tex to the Dodgers for Clayton Kershaw and Matt Kemp/James Loney but that deal would have to have been made a month ago because with they way Loney's been playing in the bigs they don't need a first baseman anymore. Detroit has a big need, but beyond Andrew Miller and Maybin there's not much in that organization that interests me and those two guys are pretty much untouchable. Yanks aren't giving up Hughes, BoSox won't part with Buchholtz. If I'm JD I'm still on the phone with all those teams trying to get a deal done, but if none of those teams budge then I call Atlanta back and accept this offer...which isn't bad at all for a guy not in your long term plans.
I know most people would want any trade with Atlanta to bring Salty back to be our catcher. While I like Salty as much as the next guy, I think we wouldn't be able to get much else back if we got him. I start with Salty and Harrison, but I'm not sure if they...or any team...is going to trade their two top prospects. I'd rather get Harrison and two other decent prospects instead of Salty and a bag of beans.
Harrison is one of the best pitching prospects around that no one talks about. Drafted in the third round in 2003 out of a North Carolina High School Harrison has shown an amazingly advanced feel for pitching...I'm sure being in the Braves system doesn't hurt. A six-foot-five lefty with a rare combination of power stuff and plus command. His fastball sits comfortably in the low 90s and has touched 95; his curve and change up are both plus offerings. But, as good as Harrison's stuff is--and it's excellent--he doesn't miss a lot of bats. At times, he can be guilty of throwing too many strikes and giving opposing batters too many hittable pitches, as opposed to working with the count. However, learning how to set up hitters better and when to throw a curve outside the zone can come with age. Harrison is currently in AA Mississippi for the Braves where he's thrown 107 groundball outs to 73 flys. He may never be an ace...well not a true ace, the Rangers ace, yes!...but he should be a strong #2 starter and still has a lot of potential.
The Braves got Chase Fontaine in the second round last season in the June draft where he promtly hit .296/.411/.412 at Rookie-level Danville. A very good hitter who draws walks in bunches; fundamentally sound both at the plate and in the field; your basic baseball rat who loves playing and takes well to coaching. His real first name is Robert, which is nowhere near as cool as being called Chase. But his combination of plate discipline and coachability make him a legit prospect. Even though he's far away, he should move up quick.
Jamie Richmond is another young arm in the Braves organization that seems to have a shot at being a good big leaguer. Richmond sort of reminds me of a younger Harrison, his strikeout rates are good but not great but he has phenomonal control; walking 6 batters in 78.1 pro innings. Another thing that is very appealing about Richmond is that he has yet to surrender a long ball. As a professional, no one has hit a home run off of Jamie Richmond. If a pitcher throws strikes and keeps the ball in the park he'll give his team a chance to win, Richmond does both of those things as well as any 20 year old in baseball.
If trading these three guys and net the Rangers two new starters who will be under club control for 4-5 years, as well as 4 new guys to add to their annunal Top 10 Prospect Rankings next year I'll consider it a success.
Adding Choo and Milledge to the starting lineup with Max Ramirez, Matt Harrison, Chase Fontaine, and Jamie Richmond to the minor leagues probably wouldn't make Ranger fans see the light at the end of the tunnel...but at least we'd know we were pointed in the right direction, something I have no faith in currently.
Of course if Joe Savery RHP Rice, Ric Porcello RHP HS, Brett Cecil LHP Maryland, Wes Roemer RHP CSF, Corey Brown OF OSU, Tony Thomas Jr 2B FSU, Matt Harvey RHP HS, and Kyle Russell OF UT were actually drafted by the Rangers, our minor system would be one of the top 5 in the league.
In this column I'll focus on realistic trades possibilities for Gagne, Aki, and Big Tex. Since you're not going to get Philip Hughes or Andrew Miller/Cameron Maybin, I recommend trading each guy separately and loading up on undervalued guys, pre arbitration eligible guys who can start next year, and really young guys with upside.
Eric Gagne to Cleveland for OF Shin-Soo Choo and C Maximiliano Ramirez
Besides setting the record for coolest names ever in a trade, I think this deal makes sense for both teams. Texas gets a guy who can step in a play right now, Choo, and a young guy with a lot of upside, Maximiliano, while Cle gets bullpen help they so desperately need.
Shin-Soo Choo may not be a name that is widely known to Ranger fans but he does some things very well; he gets on base, runs well, and catches the ball. The 24 year old Korean can play each of the outfield spots as well at DH and would step right into the Texas' lineup. Choo is a victim of a numbers crunch in Cleveland as Trot Nixon, David Delluci, Jason Michaels, Casey Blake, Grady Sizemore, and Travis Hafner are all blocking his way to the show. Due to injuries he got some playing time last year, and in about a month and a half of work he hit .295/.373/.473 for the Tribe. Those numbers look shockingly similar to his career minor league totals, .303/.393/.464. He may not get a lot better as he goes on, but he's good enough to play everyday in the majors right now.
Max Ramirez is the next in line of young Latin catchers. Ramirez was on the World Roster for the Futures Game, but did not play. He has a very strong arm and walks a lot...two things I like from my catchers. He does strike out a lot, but he has yet to post an OBP under .408 in any of his minor league stops. He's far away from being big league ready, but with Victor Martinez entrenched at the 2 spot I wouldn't be shocked if the Indians moved him for big league help, especially a legit closer like Gagne.
Cleveland was the other big competitor for Gagne's services this offseason, and it would stand to reason that after the great first half he's had they still have a lot of interest in him. The Indians should be the team that is the best fit for Gagne; in a pennant race, in that race with another team that needs bullpen help, stats oriented organization, lots of young talent. Trading a guy who can't get in their lineup and a wet behind the ears backstop isn't too much to ask. But since he's going to be a free agent after this year and is still an injury risk don't expect the moon in return. Choo would start for us and Ramirez would be one of our top 10 prospects, not a bad haul.
Akinora Otsuka and Joaquin Arias to the New York Mets for CF Lastings Milledge
Omar Minaya and the rest of the Metropolitans brass have been down on Lastings for awhile...seemingly upset that he hasn't had instant success in the majors and the dreaded but very vague "attitude problems" have been associated with him, as well. However, Omar can lose sight of the big picture and overpay for immediate gratification especially for a big name. While Aki isn't a big name...Gagne maybe if you could switch these two trades...but he fills a very important hole; late relief. Getting to Billy Wagner has been a bit of a problem this year, and if he goes down...not completely unforeseen for a 35+ year old player...NYM has no alternatives. Aki gives them a proven 8th inning guy who can also close. Two big reasons I think Aki is more likely for this deal;
1) He's still under club control for 2 more seasons, so whomever acquires him will have him for much longer than Gagne.
2) Gagne has control of where he goes, and because his contract includes financial incentives based on numbers of games finished it's unlikely that he'll agree to be traded somewhere where he wouldn't be the closer.
I'm not a fan of Arias, but I think Minaya might be. He covets toolsy Latin players and Arias is nothing if that. Reyes at short would block Joaquin, but the Mets are in desparte need of a second basemen...Reyes and Arias up the middle would cover insane amounts of ground.
Milledge is the type of young, very talented, pre-arb eligible, undervalued player Texas should target. As a 21 year old in the International League (a notorious pitchers league) he's hitting .277/.388/.440 for AAA Norfolk. For a young hitter, he has very developed abilities to go the other way and a keen batting eye...drawing walks in 14% of his plate appearances this year. Scouts have long raved about his tools, his Soriano like quick bat and footspeed made him a first round pick out of high school in '03.
Somewhat similar to Choo in Cleveland, Milledge faces the outfield logjam with Carlos Beltran, Shawn Green, Moises Alou with the big club and young studs Carlos Gomez and Fernando Martinez going to be ready for the bigs soon, Milledge seems like the odd man out even though he'll be a good player with a real shot of being a superstar. Milledge was called up the other day, but I really think it's for more of a showcase to other teams than anything.
I thought going into this year the the Mets would try and move Milledge for a starter, but with the way John Maine and Oliver Perez have steppped up that need seems to have been largely filled from within. They may still want a starter in return, so I'd see if Millwood or Padilla or Volquez have any appeal to them. Bottom line is that there is a deal to be made here, the Mets are willing to part with Milledge and getting a top-notch set up man who can close who and will still be yours for 2 years after this AND a young athletic uber toolsy minor leaguer is a fair price.
Mark Teixeira to Atlanta for LHP Matt Harrison, SS Chase Fontaine, and RHP Jamie Richmond
The big one, you've all been waiting for...not what you were hoping for? Me neither...but I think it's about as good as it'g going to get. Atlanta is in a playoff race (shock!) and they have a big need for a power hitting first baseman. Not making the playoffs last year could give GM John Schurholtz the extra encentive to get a big deal done, even if it means parting with a guy like Matt Harrison.
I was a big proponent of trading Tex to the Dodgers for Clayton Kershaw and Matt Kemp/James Loney but that deal would have to have been made a month ago because with they way Loney's been playing in the bigs they don't need a first baseman anymore. Detroit has a big need, but beyond Andrew Miller and Maybin there's not much in that organization that interests me and those two guys are pretty much untouchable. Yanks aren't giving up Hughes, BoSox won't part with Buchholtz. If I'm JD I'm still on the phone with all those teams trying to get a deal done, but if none of those teams budge then I call Atlanta back and accept this offer...which isn't bad at all for a guy not in your long term plans.
I know most people would want any trade with Atlanta to bring Salty back to be our catcher. While I like Salty as much as the next guy, I think we wouldn't be able to get much else back if we got him. I start with Salty and Harrison, but I'm not sure if they...or any team...is going to trade their two top prospects. I'd rather get Harrison and two other decent prospects instead of Salty and a bag of beans.
Harrison is one of the best pitching prospects around that no one talks about. Drafted in the third round in 2003 out of a North Carolina High School Harrison has shown an amazingly advanced feel for pitching...I'm sure being in the Braves system doesn't hurt. A six-foot-five lefty with a rare combination of power stuff and plus command. His fastball sits comfortably in the low 90s and has touched 95; his curve and change up are both plus offerings. But, as good as Harrison's stuff is--and it's excellent--he doesn't miss a lot of bats. At times, he can be guilty of throwing too many strikes and giving opposing batters too many hittable pitches, as opposed to working with the count. However, learning how to set up hitters better and when to throw a curve outside the zone can come with age. Harrison is currently in AA Mississippi for the Braves where he's thrown 107 groundball outs to 73 flys. He may never be an ace...well not a true ace, the Rangers ace, yes!...but he should be a strong #2 starter and still has a lot of potential.
The Braves got Chase Fontaine in the second round last season in the June draft where he promtly hit .296/.411/.412 at Rookie-level Danville. A very good hitter who draws walks in bunches; fundamentally sound both at the plate and in the field; your basic baseball rat who loves playing and takes well to coaching. His real first name is Robert, which is nowhere near as cool as being called Chase. But his combination of plate discipline and coachability make him a legit prospect. Even though he's far away, he should move up quick.
Jamie Richmond is another young arm in the Braves organization that seems to have a shot at being a good big leaguer. Richmond sort of reminds me of a younger Harrison, his strikeout rates are good but not great but he has phenomonal control; walking 6 batters in 78.1 pro innings. Another thing that is very appealing about Richmond is that he has yet to surrender a long ball. As a professional, no one has hit a home run off of Jamie Richmond. If a pitcher throws strikes and keeps the ball in the park he'll give his team a chance to win, Richmond does both of those things as well as any 20 year old in baseball.
If trading these three guys and net the Rangers two new starters who will be under club control for 4-5 years, as well as 4 new guys to add to their annunal Top 10 Prospect Rankings next year I'll consider it a success.
Adding Choo and Milledge to the starting lineup with Max Ramirez, Matt Harrison, Chase Fontaine, and Jamie Richmond to the minor leagues probably wouldn't make Ranger fans see the light at the end of the tunnel...but at least we'd know we were pointed in the right direction, something I have no faith in currently.
Of course if Joe Savery RHP Rice, Ric Porcello RHP HS, Brett Cecil LHP Maryland, Wes Roemer RHP CSF, Corey Brown OF OSU, Tony Thomas Jr 2B FSU, Matt Harvey RHP HS, and Kyle Russell OF UT were actually drafted by the Rangers, our minor system would be one of the top 5 in the league.
A Good TV Night
I found myself last night with nothing to do, for the first time in a long time (hence the space between posts.) With the Rangers not on and ESPN showing international softball it was shaping up to be a lost evening.
But then! (great phrase! You could write a book about "but then!") MAVS SUMMER D-LEAGUE BALL to the rescue!!!
That is only slightly sarcastic, I was very excited this was on. It was my first time to see Fazekas and Reyshawn wear Maverick uniforms...granted they were the weird practice unis...but still. Plus it was against the hated Rockets.
A few impressions from the game:
1) The level of play was extremely high. There were times where it seemed a bit like 10 guys playing 1 on 1, but for the most part everyone played within a team concept. Everyone played their butts off.
2) JJ Barea is a NBA player. I remember watching him last year in exhibition games and thinking to myself, "who is this little guy...did no one tell him he has no chance of making the team?" But no one ever did, he'll never be a starter but he'll be a valuable backup pure PG for a long time.
3) JJB wasn't the most impressive PG in that game Aaron Brooks, the Rockets' first round pick, was blowin' bye everyone. Best of all he looked to pass, something he very rarely did collegiately at Oregon.
4) Maurice Ager looked like the best player on the floor...probably because he was.
5) Pops absolutely hates the rim, just watch him next time he dunks. I think the rim stole his girlfriend or something.
6) Reyshawn was playing D...very good sign.
7) Fazekas didn't have his shot working, but his release was very quick and clean.
I would have more but the I got distracted watching this. How am I supposed to fully immerse myself in summer hoops when The Office and Flight of the Concords is on at the same time?? For those of you who have not seen Flight of the Concords (HBO) it's currently locked in a steel cage match with Human Giant (MTV) for the title of Lincoln's favorite new comedy show.
But then! (great phrase! You could write a book about "but then!") MAVS SUMMER D-LEAGUE BALL to the rescue!!!
That is only slightly sarcastic, I was very excited this was on. It was my first time to see Fazekas and Reyshawn wear Maverick uniforms...granted they were the weird practice unis...but still. Plus it was against the hated Rockets.
A few impressions from the game:
1) The level of play was extremely high. There were times where it seemed a bit like 10 guys playing 1 on 1, but for the most part everyone played within a team concept. Everyone played their butts off.
2) JJ Barea is a NBA player. I remember watching him last year in exhibition games and thinking to myself, "who is this little guy...did no one tell him he has no chance of making the team?" But no one ever did, he'll never be a starter but he'll be a valuable backup pure PG for a long time.
3) JJB wasn't the most impressive PG in that game Aaron Brooks, the Rockets' first round pick, was blowin' bye everyone. Best of all he looked to pass, something he very rarely did collegiately at Oregon.
4) Maurice Ager looked like the best player on the floor...probably because he was.
5) Pops absolutely hates the rim, just watch him next time he dunks. I think the rim stole his girlfriend or something.
6) Reyshawn was playing D...very good sign.
7) Fazekas didn't have his shot working, but his release was very quick and clean.
I would have more but the I got distracted watching this. How am I supposed to fully immerse myself in summer hoops when The Office and Flight of the Concords is on at the same time?? For those of you who have not seen Flight of the Concords (HBO) it's currently locked in a steel cage match with Human Giant (MTV) for the title of Lincoln's favorite new comedy show.
Friday, July 6, 2007
Talkin' Baseball
...And Mavs...and whatever else I feel like, it's my blog!
There has been a plethora of major milestones being hit recently, 500HRs, 600HRs, 3000 hits, and soon 756.
The Big Hurt went big fly for the 500th time in his illustrious career off noted worm-burner, Carlos Silva. Biggio got his 2997-3002 hits in classic extra inning affair vs. the Rockies, which concluded when El Cabayo hit a walk-off grand slam...all in all a very cool day of baseball.
Interesting, if coincidental, that these two players would zero out their baseball odometers on the same day, as both have been among the most underrated players of their generation.
Craig Biggio is a demigod in H-Town, but apparently no one can see him play through all the smog as he has never received the national attention he has deserved...save the obligatory you-just-reached-a-major-milestone-Tim-Kurkjian-SportCenter-5-minute-tribute. Biggio is probably the fifth greatest second baseman of all time (behind Hornsby, Lajoie, Eddie Collins, and Joe Morgan) and while he spent a good part of his career away from the keystone sack, he caught and played centerfield...name me another player who could do that! His versatility defensively gains him brownie points over guys like Paul Molitor and Rod Carew who shifted to the corner infield, or DH...even though he hasn't been a good defensive player for some time now.
Actually Biggio hasn't really been a good player overall after turning 35, he's been a liability in the field and while he was once and on-base machine (the best kind of machine...other than this) his bat has really slowed as evidence by his increased strikeout and decreased walk rate over the last part of his career (pitchers know he can't keep up with a good fastball, so they just throw them by him.) Biggio has been on a tear since reaching that magical milestone, getting his numbers all the way up to .260/.302/.405. Still, the 'Stros are a team that is trying to contend and as great as he has been Biggio now stands in the way of them winning ball games.
Since Biggio gets points for playing anywhere up the middle defensively, being a really good base runner, great team player/clubhouse guy, always hustling, being the guy you want your daughter to marry, shaking hands, and kissing babies...Frank Thomas could be opposite; kissing hands and shaking babies.
And yet even though he was never a good defensive player or base runner or friendly with the media or teammates or front office personnel, Thomas is one of the 15 best hitters of the live ball era.
From BaseballReference the career leaders of Adjusted OPS+
Babe Ruth
Ted Williams
Barry Bonds
Lou Gehrig
Rogers Hornsby
Mickey Mantle
Albert Pujols
Ty Cobb
Jimmie Foxx
Mark McGwire (yes, Big Mac!)
Stan Musial
Frank Thomas
That puts him as the 6th best right handed hitter in the live ball era, using this one metric which admittedly isn't perfect but it's a pretty darned good easy gauge.
Also unlike Biggio, Thomas is still a good player currently hitting .247/.377/.442
Neither of these guys needed to reach a nice round number in their stats column to garner their ticket to Cooperstown.
*****
Sammy Sosa hit 600 and has a ton of RBIs. Yet somehow he was not an All-Star, shock, awe, amazement, saddness...ok that's all the sarcasm I can muster. I'm about to point out something that no body else has pointed out all year long. Yes he has surpased my expectations...which were absolutely zero (when he got 1 hit he surpased my expectations)...get ready, brace yourselves.
Sammy Sosa is not having a good year!
There has been a plethora of major milestones being hit recently, 500HRs, 600HRs, 3000 hits, and soon 756.
The Big Hurt went big fly for the 500th time in his illustrious career off noted worm-burner, Carlos Silva. Biggio got his 2997-3002 hits in classic extra inning affair vs. the Rockies, which concluded when El Cabayo hit a walk-off grand slam...all in all a very cool day of baseball.
Interesting, if coincidental, that these two players would zero out their baseball odometers on the same day, as both have been among the most underrated players of their generation.
Craig Biggio is a demigod in H-Town, but apparently no one can see him play through all the smog as he has never received the national attention he has deserved...save the obligatory you-just-reached-a-major-milestone-Tim-Kurkjian-SportCenter-5-minute-tribute. Biggio is probably the fifth greatest second baseman of all time (behind Hornsby, Lajoie, Eddie Collins, and Joe Morgan) and while he spent a good part of his career away from the keystone sack, he caught and played centerfield...name me another player who could do that! His versatility defensively gains him brownie points over guys like Paul Molitor and Rod Carew who shifted to the corner infield, or DH...even though he hasn't been a good defensive player for some time now.
Actually Biggio hasn't really been a good player overall after turning 35, he's been a liability in the field and while he was once and on-base machine (the best kind of machine...other than this) his bat has really slowed as evidence by his increased strikeout and decreased walk rate over the last part of his career (pitchers know he can't keep up with a good fastball, so they just throw them by him.) Biggio has been on a tear since reaching that magical milestone, getting his numbers all the way up to .260/.302/.405. Still, the 'Stros are a team that is trying to contend and as great as he has been Biggio now stands in the way of them winning ball games.
Since Biggio gets points for playing anywhere up the middle defensively, being a really good base runner, great team player/clubhouse guy, always hustling, being the guy you want your daughter to marry, shaking hands, and kissing babies...Frank Thomas could be opposite; kissing hands and shaking babies.
And yet even though he was never a good defensive player or base runner or friendly with the media or teammates or front office personnel, Thomas is one of the 15 best hitters of the live ball era.
From BaseballReference the career leaders of Adjusted OPS+
Babe Ruth
Ted Williams
Barry Bonds
Lou Gehrig
Rogers Hornsby
Mickey Mantle
Albert Pujols
Ty Cobb
Jimmie Foxx
Mark McGwire (yes, Big Mac!)
Stan Musial
Frank Thomas
That puts him as the 6th best right handed hitter in the live ball era, using this one metric which admittedly isn't perfect but it's a pretty darned good easy gauge.
Also unlike Biggio, Thomas is still a good player currently hitting .247/.377/.442
Neither of these guys needed to reach a nice round number in their stats column to garner their ticket to Cooperstown.
*****
Sammy Sosa hit 600 and has a ton of RBIs. Yet somehow he was not an All-Star, shock, awe, amazement, saddness...ok that's all the sarcasm I can muster. I'm about to point out something that no body else has pointed out all year long. Yes he has surpased my expectations...which were absolutely zero (when he got 1 hit he surpased my expectations)...get ready, brace yourselves.
Sammy Sosa is not having a good year!
I'll wait, so let you collect yourselves.
dodododododo
ok, we're back!
The Sammy for All-Star talk is only slightly less rediculous than the "We're winning without Tex, therefore we're a better team just because he's not out there."
Sammy is getting tons of RBI oppurtunites due soley to where he's hitting in the lineup. He's hitting .251/.304/.469. How many All-Star/Comeback Player of Year/Baseball Saints have .300 OBPs?
Tex, Mike Young, Ian Kinsler, Marlon Byrd, and Kenny Lofton are all having better years as is the entire bullpen.
*****
Good news in Mavs land, Stack is back! More than once last season I yelled at the tv, berating Jerry for being out of position or making a bad pass, but I'm pleased as punch to have him back because far more often I yelled in excitement after a big made basket.
Bring back the House means Dallas maintains continuity with its current cast of characters, that I still believe is championship caliber. While most people probably aren't dancing in the streets that we resigned a 32 year old bench player, his departure would have left a big hole on this team. We need Stack, and I think Stack needs us, Avery did a great job limiting his minutes and just asking Jerry to be Jerry. He was put in great spots to succeed last year.
Also of note, there are no other free agents out there that could fill what Stack does for the Mavs. Matt Barnes gives you energy but dude can't score, Desmond Mason is athletic but really not very good at basketball, Mickael Pietrus would be the closest thing but he's no where near as tough/physical/clutch as Jerry Stack.
Other name I want the Mavs to pursue this off season, Cleveland GF Sasha Pavlovic. The Cavs are right up against the luxury tax and will not be able to keep Sasha and Varejao. Cle did extend a qualifying offer but if Dallas makes a serious offer, I doubt the Fighting LeBrons will match since it will cost them double in luxury tax sanctions.
Pavlovic is coming off a really good playoff run where he was asked to cover opposing teams big offensive threats. Defensively he did good work against Vince Carter, Rip Hamilton, and Manu Ginobili.
Sasha is a good shooter from the land of three 40.5% last season, and improving. He's also not afraid to go to hole, using Bob Ortegol patented shot-fake-and-drive very effectively.
The Mavs really only have two needs: another big man who can post up/rebound (like every team ever in the history of basketball) and a swingman who can play d/shoot outside/slash inside. The first thing is very hard to find, but Pavolvic fills the second need and he's much more attainable than another guy who does.
Here's maybe the best thing about Sasha...he's 23 years old!! If went to college for 4 years, he'd just now be a rookie and he's already a solid NBA player and could be a very, VERY useful player for the Mavs Dynasty.
**** Last chance to leave comments for places to go in Mizzu!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)