I'm just ranking them by quantifiable OPS, rather than putting in my opinion, or factoring in fielding, and so on. This will be ongoing over the next few weeks.
1. Brian McCann, Atlanta (.834 OPS)
McCann's been at or near the top of the NL's best catchers over the last couple of years, but you haven't read a lot about him. That should change at some point – it may take a career season to do so, however.
2. Miguel Montero, Arizona (.832 OPS)
Took a significant step up last year. A little less power than McCann, but a few more singles and walks. I'd take either one of them.
3. Carlos Ruiz, Philadelphia (.780 OPS)
The Phillies really need a platoon partner for Ruiz – they let Chris Coste go halfway through the season. I don't think he's capable of handling 110 games by himself without his numbers taking a hit.
4. Chris Ianetta/Yorvit Torrealba, Colorado (.773 OPS)
The Rockies have waited patiently for Ianetta to arrive, even signing Torrealba to a two-year deal after winning the 2007 pennant. The wait has paid off; Ianetta's now at about the same level as McCann or Montero, and Torrealba's a free agent. Torrealba can still hit, but he's got injury issues and threw out just 14 percent of baserunners trying to steal, worst in the NL.
5. John Baker/Ronny Paulino, Florida (.761 OPS)
Marlins dealt for Paulino last year even though Baker was coming on, but having them split the receiving duties was a good idea. Baker has more power, Paulino hits for average better.
6. Bengie Molina, San Francisco (.727 OPS)
Hit 20 homers last year, and plays good defense. That's all he does. He took 13 walks in 520 plate appearances. He's a free agent, and will shift into a platoon role unless the Giants panic and offer him arbitration.
7. Yadier Molina, St. Louis (.714 OPS)
Took 22 walks in 510 plate appearances, which was far better than his brother. Also hit .294, a career high. Good defense, doesn't hit for power.
8. Nick Hundley/Henry Blanco, San Diego (.712 OPS)
Hundley had a pretty decent first year and Blanco adds a little sock and is a good defender. Not a strength, but the Padres have a lot bigger issues than this.
9. Ryan Doumit/Jason Jaramillo, Pittsburgh (.697 OPS)
Doumit missed a lot of last year due to injury; if he plays 100 or more games, he'll rank in the top four. Jaramillo's a catch-and-throw backup.
10. Ramon Hernandez/Ryan Hanigan, Cincinnati (.696 OPS)
A couple of years ago Hernandez was among the better catchers offensively, but time and injuries have taken their toll; now he takes a lot of walks but little else. Hanigan pitched in when Hernandez was hurt in August; inexplicably the Reds resigned Hernandez for another season.
11. Russell Martin, Los Angeles (.680 OPS)
Los Angeles needs to do a major rethink here. A few years ago Martin was neck and neck with Brian McCann; now he's among the low middle catchers in the league, likely because he's playing too much (his 586 plate appearances were 38 ahead of McCann and 66 ahead of everybody else). A platoon partner might help. Brad Ausmus is not that partner.
12. Geovany Soto/Koyie Hill, Chicago (.674 OPS)
Soto was the Rookie of the Year in 2008, but he reported to camp in 2009 out of shape, played in the World Baseball Classic, and then had an awful season. Hill's a catch and throw guy who's just happy to be in The Show after some of the injuries he's had.
13. Omir Santos/Brian Schneider, New York (.665 OPS)
I don't the Mets have a clue here. They sent Ramon Castro packing early in the season while Schneider was still on the DL, leaving the catching in the hands of unproven Omir Santos. Santos had an okay year, so Schneider was allowed to leave as a free agent. Josh Thole is the catcher of the future – a poor man's Joe Mauer – but he needs about 300 AB at Triple A.
14. Chris Coste/Humberto Quintero, Houston (.638 OPS)
Coste was released by Philadelphia during the season, but latched on with Houston after they concluded J.R. Towles won't hit major league pitching. Quintero doesn't hit much, but has the best throwing arm in the league.
15. Jason Kendall, Milwaukee (.6361 OPS)
Should not be offered a starting position. Lowest slugging percentage among the NL catching group, and only avoided lowest OPS due to getting hit by 17 pitches. I read in a recent Mets blog entry they should go after Kendall, because if he hit .270 they'd be happy… but Kendall hasn't hit .270 since 2006. Also among the league's worst at throwing out baserunners.
16. Josh Bard/Wil Nieves, Washington (.6357 OPS)
Nationals platooned two guys who washed out on five different teams between them, which is more than I need to know about the Nationals.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Friday, November 13, 2009
We Just Want a Hit
It's frustrating enough the Mets can't develop good hitters. I'm not even sure they know what one is.When Derek Jeter was making his chase toward the Yankees' all-time hit record earlier this year, three things stuck out for me:
1) this was an awful lot of coverage for a team hit record. I mean, would anyone on the Kansas City Royals or Milwaukee Brewers get the same amount of coverage?
2) a radio announcer said Jeter had a chance to break Pete Rose's all-time hit record, which I initially dismissed, reviewed, and revised my opinion (more on that some other time);
3) the Mets' all-time hit leader is still Ed Kranepool.
Actually, I knew about that one a long time ago. In Bill James' 1992 Baseball Book, his notes on the Mets stated the Mets' all-time hitting records, even considering they're an adolescent franchise, were disgraceful. "Ed Kranepool, for Chrissakes, is the all-time Mets hit leader. And no one's chasing him." Well, that was 18 years ago, and the situation's still the same.
The problem is not Ed Kranepool's fault – hey, he got the maximum out of his limited abilities, and played for the team for 19 seasons – it's the Mets' fault for their inability to develop hitters. I put together a list of the 100 players with the most hits that have played since the Mets started business in 1962 (so Stan Musial, who retired after the 1963 season, is on this list, while Ted Williams, who retired in 1960, is not), and added the team that developed the player. (For the most part, that's the team for whom the player toiled in the minors, although I've made a couple of exceptions -- Roberto Clemente, for example, would likely never have played for the Dodgers, but the Pittsburgh Pirates saw something and drafted him away.)
Of the 30 teams now playing, only the four most recent expansion teams -- the Colorado Rockies, Florida Marlins, Arizona Diamondbacks, and Tampa Bay Rays -- and the Mets are the only teams with nobody on the list.
1. Pete Rose, Cincinnati Reds
2. Hank Aaron, Atlanta (Milwaukee) Braves
3. Stan Musial, St. Louis Cardinals
4. Carl Yastrzemski, Boston Red Sox
5. Paul Molitor, Milwaukee Brewers
6. Willie Mays, San Francisco (New York) Giants
7. Eddie Murray, Baltimore Orioles
8. Cal Ripken, Baltimore Orioles
9. George Brett, Kansas City Royals
10. Robin Yount, Milwaukee Brewers
11. Tony Gwynn, San Diego Padres
12. Dave Winfield, San Diego Padres
13. Craig Biggio, Houston Astros
14. Rickey Henderson, Oakland Athletics
15. Rod Carew, Minnesota Twins
16. Lou Brock, Chicago Cubs
17. Rafael Palmeiro, Chicago Cubs
18. Wade Boggs, Boston Red Sox
19. Al Kaline, Detroit Tigers
20. Roberto Clemente, Pittsburgh Pirates
21. Frank Robinson, Cincinnati Reds
22. Barry Bonds, Pittsburgh Pirates
23. Harold Baines, Chicago White Sox
24. Brooks Robinson, Baltimore Orioles
25. Andre Dawson, Montreal Expos
26. Ken Griffey Jr., Seattle Mariners
27. Vada Pinson, Cincinnati Reds
28. Derek Jeter, New York Yankees
29. Al Oliver, Pittsburgh Pirates
30. Tony Perez, Cincinnati Reds
31. Roberto Alomar, San Diego Padres
32. Rusty Staub, Houston Astros
33. Bill Buckner, Los Angeles Dodgers
34. Dave Parker, Pittsburgh Pirates
35. Ivan Rodriguez, Texas Rangers
36. Billy Williams, Chicago Cubs
37. Omar Vizquel, Seattle Mariners
38. Gary Sheffield, Milwaukee Brewers
39. Luis Aparicio, Chicago White Sox
40. Nellie Fox, Oakland (Philadelphia?) Athletics
41. Tim Raines, Montreal Expos
42. Steve Garvey, Los Angeles Dodgers
43. Luis Gonzalez, Houston Astros
44. Julio Franco, Texas Rangers
45. Reggie Jackson, Oakland (Kansas City) Athletics
46. Ernie Banks, Chicago Cubs
47. Richie Ashburn, Philadelphia Phillies
48. Willie Davis, Los Angeles Dodgers
49. Steve Finley, Baltimore Orioles
50. Alex Rodriguez, Seattle Mariners
51. Joe Morgan, Houston Astros
52. Buddy Bell, Cleveland Indians
53. Garrett Anderson, Los Angeles (California) Angels of Anaheim
54. Manny Ramirez, Cleveland Indians
55. Fred McGriff, Toronto Blue Jays
56. Ted Simmons, St. Louis Cardinals
57. Frank Thomas, Chicago White Sox
58. Jeff Kent, Toronto Blue Jays
59. Ozzie Smith, San Diego Padres
60. Jim Rice, Boston Red Sox
61. Red Schoendienst, St. Louis Cardinals
62. Dwight Evans, Boston Red Sox
63. Mark Grace, Chicago Cubs
64. Kenny Lofton, Cleveland Indians
65. Johnny Damon, Kansas City Royals
66. Mickey Mantle, New York Yankees
67. Sammy Sosa, Texas Rangers
68. Chipper Jones, Atlanta Braves
69. Ryne Sandberg, Philadelphia Phillies
70. Chili Davis, San Francisco Giants
71. Brett Butler, Atlanta Braves
72. Lou Whitaker, Detroit Tigers
73. Alan Trammell, Detroit Tigers
74. Carlton Fisk, Boston Red Sox
75. Orlando Cepeda, San Francisco (New York) Giants
76. Joe Torre, Atlanta (Milwaukee) Braves
77. Barry Larkin, Cincinnati Red
78. Bernie Williams, New York Yankees
79. Andres Galarraga, Montreal Expos
80. Dave Concepcion, Cincinnati Reds
81. B.J. Surhoff, Milwaukee Brewers
82. Eddie Matthews, Atlanta (Boston?) Braves
83. Jeff Bagwell, Boston Red Sox
84. Kirby Puckett, Minnesota Twins
85. Gary Gaetti, Minnesota Twins
86. Tony Fernandez, Toronto Blue Jays
87. Willie McGee, St. Louis Cardinals
88. Ron Santo, Chicago Cubs
89. Marquis Grissom, Montreal Expos
90. Jose Cruz, St. Louis Cardinals
91. Vladimir Guerrero, Montreal Expos
92. Bert Campaneris, Oakland (Kansas City) Athletics
93. Edgar Martinez, Seattle Mariners
94. John Olerud, Toronto Blue Jays
95. Mike Schmidt, Philadelphia Phillies
96. Willie Stargell, Pittsburgh Pirates
97. Graig Nettles, Minnesota Twins
98. Darrell Evans, Atlanta Braves
99. Willie McCovey, San Francisco Giants
100. Willie Randolph, Pittsburgh Pirates
The player with the most hits the Mets developed is Ken Singleton, who had just over 2,000 hits. (Of course, he only played a little over one season for the team before he was traded away.)
Speaking of Singleton, note this is the organization that developed the hitter. He may have been traded away after before his career got in gear (that's why Lou Brock is listed as a Chicago Cub, much to the embarrassment of fans here).
The interesting thing is no team has more than six players on the list, and all but two of the other 25 teams has at least three (Kansas City has two, and the Angels one). A bunch of teams are tied with six: Atlanta, Boston, the Cubs, Cincinnati, and Pittsburgh.
Now, the Mets have 14 players who played for them at one time or another one the list. (No big deal, the Yankees have 13.) They are:
#6 - Willie Mays
#7 - Eddie Murray
#14 - Rickey Henderson
#31 - Roberto Alomar
#32 - Rusty Staub
#38 - Gary Sheffield
#44 - Julio Franco
#47 - Richie Ashburn
#58 - Jeff Kent
#71 - Brett Butler
#76 - Joe Torre
#86 - Tony Fernandez
#94 - John Olerud
#100 - Willie Randolph
Notice something here? With the exceptions of Staub, Kent, and Olerud, all of these players were Mets when their careers were circling the drain. (I suppose you could make an argument for Eddie Murray or Tony Fernandez.) The Mets seem to have a habit of getting great hitters at the tail end of their careers, and in some cases were surprised when they had very little left. Compare this to the Yankees, who not only have their three homegrown guys (Jeter, Mickey Mantle, and Bernie Williams), but almost every other player who played for them on this list that they picked up along the way was at or near peak: Dave Winfield, Gary Sheffield, Reggie Jackson, Alex Rodriguez, Johnny Damon, and so on.
Okay, that part is what it is. The question is, what can the Mets do about the future?
1) Focus on developing hitters. Gee, that seems obvious. But it's clearly been a problem -- it's one thing to have developed great hitters and trade them away, but the situation is worse for the Mets, in that they're not developing anyone. The organization has been extant for nearly 50 years; by this time they should know how to scout and choose good hitters.
2) Keep the good players. The roster of bad trades the Mets have made is legendary: Amos Otis for Joe Foy, Nolan Ryan for Jim Fregosi, Rick Aguilera and Kevin Tapani for Frank Viola, Melvin Mora for Mike Bordick, Scott Kazmir for Victor Zambrano. Most of these trades have been similar: a bunch of young guys for a (semi-)established star. (I will say the Johan Santana trade has worked out quite well, so it's not foolproof.) I'm happy to say David Wright and Jose Reyes, who both have just under a thousand hits apiece, are both signed to long-term contracts -- Wright through 2012, Reyes through next year, with club options for both. Carlos Beltran, who should appear on this list in a year or two, is also signed through 2011.
3) Don't fall in love with free agent hitters older than 32. This is a failing of GM Omar Minaya, who, now that he has money to spend (he didn't when he was Montreal's GM), spends it. Of the "circling the drain" players listed above, excluding Julio Franco (who was acquired strictly to pinch-hit and carried minimal expectations), the only player younger than 32 was Tony Fernandez (who put up his career-worst numbers in a Met uniform). The others ranged in age from 34 (Alomar) to 41 (Mays). Picking up hitters at that age and expecting them to perform as they have is not a winning strategy. Pitchers will occasionally put up good seasons at that age, but hitters peak in their late 20s (throwing out the steroid years), and start falling off gradually from age 30 on. That's why, if the Mets had the choice between Matt Holliday and Jason Bay, all other things being equal, Holliday would be the better choice, as he's two years younger. But a better choice would be to find someone younger still, if they can.
By the way, the Mets once had Jason Bay as a minor leaguer. They traded him away
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
I like to read sports columns. I'm going to agree with some conclusions, disagree with others. I generally like what I read in Sports Illustrated, and I'm okay with the columnists I see on the ESPN and Sporting News web sites.
I continue to be astonished, however, at how poor the writing, rationales, and temperament is for many of the columnists at CBSSports.com. There are exceptions: Pete Prisco knows his subject, stays within his limits, and calls himself out (for example, he admits today he was wrong on Josh McDaniels and the Broncos, as was I). Mike Freeman is hit or miss.
But Gregg Doyel -- with his continued baiting of his readers and "Bleep you, I have a column" attitude, has just worn very thin. And today's Ray Ratto column reaches new heights of poor reasoning, conclusion jumping, and bad writing.
I should start with staying Ratto's column on the problems the Mets had with Tony Bernazard (7/28/09) made a certain amount of sense (although it seemed a bit overwrought for a writer located 3,000 miles away and not privy to the day-to-day team operations). I did note that Ratto added in his 8/30/09 column (in the Chronicle only) he stated: " Fred Wilpon was a billionaire before he met Bernie Madoff; now, according to a new book, he's down $700 million and probably has to sell the New York Mets."
The Wilpons have denied that they were in trouble and the Mets were having money issues, and, as it turns out, they were right: it turned out Madoff made $48 million for the Wilpons. Rather than reversing course, however, Ratto has doubled down: his column today makes the Wilpons -- and, consequently, the Mets, seem bigger rubes than before. (Because they made money?)
Most people are unaware of how their investments work. They don't sit with their investment advisor on a day-to-day basis and review where every cent has gone. They put a certain amount of trust in the advisor. Bernard Madoff clearly betrayed the trust of a lot of investors. There's no doubt about that.
But here's Ratto's argument, verbatim: "When it turned out the Madoff scheme had bitten a huge chunk out of the Wilpon fortune, people cheered. And now that it looks like they actually made money off Berniegate, the likelihood that they'll have to go to court to defend their relationship with one of the great financial criminals of all time will cheer people as well."
Damned if you did (lose money), damned if you didn't.
Also, I haven't seen any word on the Wilpons going to court. Ratto has jumped to this conclusion without any evidence that either there would be legal proceedings against the Wilpons, or that they would fight any charges.
A few more notes:
- "Ranking this Mets team among Mets teams is difficult only because the first three Mets teams were charmingly inept and so many others were just plain inept."
It took me about three readings before I understood (I think) Ratto is referring to the New York Mets of 1962, 1963, and 1964. (Either that or he's referring to the New York Metropolitans of the 1800s -- it's hard to distinguish what he means by "teams.") Yes, the Mets have had some lousy seasons -- watching them play in the late 1970s, 1993, or 2004 was a painful business. But since 1969, they've been roughly a .500 team, with seven playoff appearances, four pennants, and two World Series during that span. A few teams have won more pennants during that span -- the Yankees have 10, the Athletics six, the Dodgers, Cardinals, and Reds five apiece. But this isn't the Detroit Lions we're talking about either.
- "But knowing the Wilpons, they'd probably blow the other $452 million on the lawyers defending their right to keep the $48 million. It's called the Carlos Delgado Postulate, wherein one wildly overpays for something that made initial sense but eventually became a galactic money pit."
First of all, "knowing the Wilpons" is a stretch for a columnist based in San Francisco to say about a New York-based ownership group. Has he ever met them? Second, I state again there's been no mention of legal action. And third, using Carlos Delgado as an example of a bad baseball move is -- well, a terrible example. Yes, Delgado missed most of last year (so did Carlos Beltran and Jose Reyes -- no one mentions all three, plus David Wright, played 159 games or more in 2008, the first time in many years a team had four players play so many games) with a hip injury that first came up the year before.
Second, let's look at the records:
Delgado, lifetime: .280/.383/.546
Delgado, ages 34-37 (with the Mets): .267/.351/.488
Yes, it's a drop, but not a shocking one for someone of his age. Using a 162-game average (Delgado played 468 games in his four years with the team, having missed 130 games last year with hip injuries and 50 the other three years), he averaged 36 home runs, 117 RBI, and 94 runs scored for every 162 games played. Most teams would be pretty happy with that kind of output from their first baseman -- and most sportswriters seemed at least a little impressed; Delgado finished 12th in the MVP vote in 2006 and 9th in 2008. Pick out Roberto Alomar or Carlos Baerga, both of whom became old men the moment they entered Shea Stadium, but most Met fans were perfectly satisfied with Delgado's performance.
I have a hard time writing about this, because I think beat sportswriters are far better equipped to critique teams and players than columnists -- or bloggers. Some columnists rarely deign to appear at the ballpark; they just take aim and let the chips fall where they may. If I were paid to write about baseball (I'm not) and critiqued a team or players without allowing for rebuttal, I'd expect a backlash; just as if I'm telling the guy in the next cubicle he doesn't know what he's doing when I'm making a mess of things. Ratto -- and the other CBSSports.com columnists -- should expect the same.
(cross-posted to CBSSports.com)
I continue to be astonished, however, at how poor the writing, rationales, and temperament is for many of the columnists at CBSSports.com. There are exceptions: Pete Prisco knows his subject, stays within his limits, and calls himself out (for example, he admits today he was wrong on Josh McDaniels and the Broncos, as was I). Mike Freeman is hit or miss.
But Gregg Doyel -- with his continued baiting of his readers and "Bleep you, I have a column" attitude, has just worn very thin. And today's Ray Ratto column reaches new heights of poor reasoning, conclusion jumping, and bad writing.
I should start with staying Ratto's column on the problems the Mets had with Tony Bernazard (7/28/09) made a certain amount of sense (although it seemed a bit overwrought for a writer located 3,000 miles away and not privy to the day-to-day team operations). I did note that Ratto added in his 8/30/09 column (in the Chronicle only) he stated: " Fred Wilpon was a billionaire before he met Bernie Madoff; now, according to a new book, he's down $700 million and probably has to sell the New York Mets."
The Wilpons have denied that they were in trouble and the Mets were having money issues, and, as it turns out, they were right: it turned out Madoff made $48 million for the Wilpons. Rather than reversing course, however, Ratto has doubled down: his column today makes the Wilpons -- and, consequently, the Mets, seem bigger rubes than before. (Because they made money?)
Most people are unaware of how their investments work. They don't sit with their investment advisor on a day-to-day basis and review where every cent has gone. They put a certain amount of trust in the advisor. Bernard Madoff clearly betrayed the trust of a lot of investors. There's no doubt about that.
But here's Ratto's argument, verbatim: "When it turned out the Madoff scheme had bitten a huge chunk out of the Wilpon fortune, people cheered. And now that it looks like they actually made money off Berniegate, the likelihood that they'll have to go to court to defend their relationship with one of the great financial criminals of all time will cheer people as well."
Damned if you did (lose money), damned if you didn't.
Also, I haven't seen any word on the Wilpons going to court. Ratto has jumped to this conclusion without any evidence that either there would be legal proceedings against the Wilpons, or that they would fight any charges.
A few more notes:
- "Ranking this Mets team among Mets teams is difficult only because the first three Mets teams were charmingly inept and so many others were just plain inept."
It took me about three readings before I understood (I think) Ratto is referring to the New York Mets of 1962, 1963, and 1964. (Either that or he's referring to the New York Metropolitans of the 1800s -- it's hard to distinguish what he means by "teams.") Yes, the Mets have had some lousy seasons -- watching them play in the late 1970s, 1993, or 2004 was a painful business. But since 1969, they've been roughly a .500 team, with seven playoff appearances, four pennants, and two World Series during that span. A few teams have won more pennants during that span -- the Yankees have 10, the Athletics six, the Dodgers, Cardinals, and Reds five apiece. But this isn't the Detroit Lions we're talking about either.
- "But knowing the Wilpons, they'd probably blow the other $452 million on the lawyers defending their right to keep the $48 million. It's called the Carlos Delgado Postulate, wherein one wildly overpays for something that made initial sense but eventually became a galactic money pit."
First of all, "knowing the Wilpons" is a stretch for a columnist based in San Francisco to say about a New York-based ownership group. Has he ever met them? Second, I state again there's been no mention of legal action. And third, using Carlos Delgado as an example of a bad baseball move is -- well, a terrible example. Yes, Delgado missed most of last year (so did Carlos Beltran and Jose Reyes -- no one mentions all three, plus David Wright, played 159 games or more in 2008, the first time in many years a team had four players play so many games) with a hip injury that first came up the year before.
Second, let's look at the records:
Delgado, lifetime: .280/.383/.546
Delgado, ages 34-37 (with the Mets): .267/.351/.488
Yes, it's a drop, but not a shocking one for someone of his age. Using a 162-game average (Delgado played 468 games in his four years with the team, having missed 130 games last year with hip injuries and 50 the other three years), he averaged 36 home runs, 117 RBI, and 94 runs scored for every 162 games played. Most teams would be pretty happy with that kind of output from their first baseman -- and most sportswriters seemed at least a little impressed; Delgado finished 12th in the MVP vote in 2006 and 9th in 2008. Pick out Roberto Alomar or Carlos Baerga, both of whom became old men the moment they entered Shea Stadium, but most Met fans were perfectly satisfied with Delgado's performance.
I have a hard time writing about this, because I think beat sportswriters are far better equipped to critique teams and players than columnists -- or bloggers. Some columnists rarely deign to appear at the ballpark; they just take aim and let the chips fall where they may. If I were paid to write about baseball (I'm not) and critiqued a team or players without allowing for rebuttal, I'd expect a backlash; just as if I'm telling the guy in the next cubicle he doesn't know what he's doing when I'm making a mess of things. Ratto -- and the other CBSSports.com columnists -- should expect the same.
(cross-posted to CBSSports.com)
Saturday, October 17, 2009
I like the Angels' uniforms, which I believe they've had since 2002. They're somewhat similar to their uniforms back in the 1960s, except the color change to red -- which to me differentiates them from the Dodgers. I wish the Mets would make use of the color orange more in their uniforms -- only three teams in the major have orange as a featured color (Mets, Giants, Orioles), and none of them use the color particularly well.
Okay, exit Burnett. With Coke, Hughes, and Chamberlain, the Yankees have some great arms coming in for the 7th and 8th innings, plus they're giving a chance for these young arms to start out with 120 innings a year and work their way up, rather than 200 the first year, 225 the second, and then three years of between 20 and 65 while they rehab.
A.J. Burnett has thrown approximately 2,000 pitches this inning. It would be useful if Fox got around to telling us this. I guess Tim McCarver is still figuring out how many feet between the pitching rubber and home plate -- it took him three tries when he noted it a few innings back ("97 feet.. no, 87 feet, no 57 feet").
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Book Review
Book Review: "Faith and Fear in Flushing: An Intense Personal History of the New York Mets," Greg W. Prince
Most boys become big fans of one pro sports team or more. Some become more fervent fans than others. And in the Age o' Internet, one can write about being a fervent fan and get positive feedback from other fervent fans. Writing a book about being a fervent fan, however, presents a larger challenge -- how do I get those who are not a fervent fan of said team to read the book without saying either a) "This guy's totally nuts," or b) "I don't like this team enough to continue reading further."
Now, I'm a Mets fan first and foremost, so I'm probably not the best to review this book; I maintain the same biases Greg Prince does (Mets great, all other teams bad, Yankees really, really bad). So I took it from a different perspective: am I like this guy? And the answer is: pretty much.
- I'm his age (he's about five weeks younger than I am)
- I grew up in the same general area (he grew up on Long Island, I grew up in New Jersey)
- we became fans around the same time (he became a fan in 1969, I waited until 1971, and thus missed the first World Series win)
- we suffered through ups and downs (the 1973 pennant, the Seaver trade and subsequent lousy teams, the mid-'80s renaissance, the '90s drop-off and the Piazza-led revival)
- he met his wife-to-be in 1987 and married her in 1991, so did I (one major difference: Karen could not care less about baseball and likely never will -- unless, of course, my son becomes a fervent baseball fan. Important note: so far, Danny appears to be a Cubs fan, but that's at my urging -- becoming a New York Mets fans in suburban Chicagoland is a surefire start on the road to social leperdom)
- we both shut off the TV volume for the 1986 World Series Game 6, Inning 10 (in my case, it was because my roommate had gone to sleep in our railroad apartment and I was being considerate -- although I was so sick of Vin Scully bringing up the various turning points that left the Mets two runs behind on a once-every-45-seconds basis that I probably would have put my foot through the screen at some point). This proved so successful that I left the volume off for Game 7, listening to the dulcet tones of Bob Murphy and Gary Thorne instead -- and has left me with a lifetime dislike of Vin Scully; I think he became a hero in southern California only because they had no basis for comparison.
My problem with the recent years, however, is I'm no longer a New Yorker. (I was a New Yorker even growing up in New Jersey, and I prefer to put the two years spent in North Carolina out of my mind.) I live in Chicagoland now. While the Mets are still my first team, I certainly listen to and watch more Cubs and White Sox games than Met games. (Note to self: try to get tickets for next year if the Mets visit Milwaukee on a weekend; rooting for opposing team in Wrigley or Comiskey is tantamount to suicide.) So, the playoff collapses in 2007 and 2008 were seen at a distance. (I do not call them "chokes"; I'll go into this more some other time.) Except for the few years Prince was in college in Florida, he's never been able to watch the Mets from a distance. The only derision he's had to deal with is that of Yankee fans (and, even though New Yorkers are notorious frontrunners -- during the 1996 World Series, almost everybody I worked with at St. Martin's Press in the Flatiron Building became a Yankee fan; the woman in the office next to mine and I stuck to our guns and rooted openly for Atlanta -- Met fans still likely outnumber Yankee fans on Long Island, which is right next to Shea Stadium and/or Citi Field). It's harder to root for a team a thousand miles away. (I usually quiet people who deride my continuing to root for the Mets first and foremost instead of a local team by asking them if they'd dump the Cubs/White Sox if they moved to NYC; they wouldn't.)
Most fans, no matter how loyal they are to their team, cannot name all the players on the active roster when the team won the pennant 35 years ago (here, I'll try without looking: Tom Seaver, Jon Matlack, Jerry Koosman, George Stone, Tug McGraw, Buzz Capra, Harry Parker, Ray Sadecki, Jerry Grote, Duffy Dyer, Ron Hodges, John Milner, Felix Millan, Bud Harrelson, Wayne Garrett, Ted Martinez, Cleon Jones, Don Hahn, Rusty Staub, Willie Mays, Dave Marshall -- okay, that's 21 out of 25; missing Jim McAndrew, George Theodore, Jim Beauchamp, and Ken Boswell). Prince can. He can also describe exactly what he was doing while watching Game 6 of the 1986 NLCS (of course, so can I: sitting in the Flatiron Building, listening to the game on weak-signaled WHN -- St. Martin's Press didn't have any televisions at that point -- with my friends and co-workers George, Jack, Janet, Lincoln, and Stuart until they won around 8 PM that night). And where he was in 1977 when the Mets traded Tom Seaver (I was watching Channel 4 news and listening to the radio mournfully). And so on.
Okay, I'm probably as much of a Mets nut as Greg Prince is. And this was fun to read as a result, and I'd recommend it to most Met fans. Don't expect literature, but do imagine you've gotten a letter (albeit a really long letter) from a friend. Would it be fun for a non-Met fan? Probably not, although it might open some eyes. (At least a few Mets fans are going to read it, given I got my copy out of the library here in Naperville, IL.)
*****
National League Championship Series starts tomorrow night. I'll try to live blog the game.
Most boys become big fans of one pro sports team or more. Some become more fervent fans than others. And in the Age o' Internet, one can write about being a fervent fan and get positive feedback from other fervent fans. Writing a book about being a fervent fan, however, presents a larger challenge -- how do I get those who are not a fervent fan of said team to read the book without saying either a) "This guy's totally nuts," or b) "I don't like this team enough to continue reading further."
Now, I'm a Mets fan first and foremost, so I'm probably not the best to review this book; I maintain the same biases Greg Prince does (Mets great, all other teams bad, Yankees really, really bad). So I took it from a different perspective: am I like this guy? And the answer is: pretty much.
- I'm his age (he's about five weeks younger than I am)
- I grew up in the same general area (he grew up on Long Island, I grew up in New Jersey)
- we became fans around the same time (he became a fan in 1969, I waited until 1971, and thus missed the first World Series win)
- we suffered through ups and downs (the 1973 pennant, the Seaver trade and subsequent lousy teams, the mid-'80s renaissance, the '90s drop-off and the Piazza-led revival)
- he met his wife-to-be in 1987 and married her in 1991, so did I (one major difference: Karen could not care less about baseball and likely never will -- unless, of course, my son becomes a fervent baseball fan. Important note: so far, Danny appears to be a Cubs fan, but that's at my urging -- becoming a New York Mets fans in suburban Chicagoland is a surefire start on the road to social leperdom)
- we both shut off the TV volume for the 1986 World Series Game 6, Inning 10 (in my case, it was because my roommate had gone to sleep in our railroad apartment and I was being considerate -- although I was so sick of Vin Scully bringing up the various turning points that left the Mets two runs behind on a once-every-45-seconds basis that I probably would have put my foot through the screen at some point). This proved so successful that I left the volume off for Game 7, listening to the dulcet tones of Bob Murphy and Gary Thorne instead -- and has left me with a lifetime dislike of Vin Scully; I think he became a hero in southern California only because they had no basis for comparison.
My problem with the recent years, however, is I'm no longer a New Yorker. (I was a New Yorker even growing up in New Jersey, and I prefer to put the two years spent in North Carolina out of my mind.) I live in Chicagoland now. While the Mets are still my first team, I certainly listen to and watch more Cubs and White Sox games than Met games. (Note to self: try to get tickets for next year if the Mets visit Milwaukee on a weekend; rooting for opposing team in Wrigley or Comiskey is tantamount to suicide.) So, the playoff collapses in 2007 and 2008 were seen at a distance. (I do not call them "chokes"; I'll go into this more some other time.) Except for the few years Prince was in college in Florida, he's never been able to watch the Mets from a distance. The only derision he's had to deal with is that of Yankee fans (and, even though New Yorkers are notorious frontrunners -- during the 1996 World Series, almost everybody I worked with at St. Martin's Press in the Flatiron Building became a Yankee fan; the woman in the office next to mine and I stuck to our guns and rooted openly for Atlanta -- Met fans still likely outnumber Yankee fans on Long Island, which is right next to Shea Stadium and/or Citi Field). It's harder to root for a team a thousand miles away. (I usually quiet people who deride my continuing to root for the Mets first and foremost instead of a local team by asking them if they'd dump the Cubs/White Sox if they moved to NYC; they wouldn't.)
Most fans, no matter how loyal they are to their team, cannot name all the players on the active roster when the team won the pennant 35 years ago (here, I'll try without looking: Tom Seaver, Jon Matlack, Jerry Koosman, George Stone, Tug McGraw, Buzz Capra, Harry Parker, Ray Sadecki, Jerry Grote, Duffy Dyer, Ron Hodges, John Milner, Felix Millan, Bud Harrelson, Wayne Garrett, Ted Martinez, Cleon Jones, Don Hahn, Rusty Staub, Willie Mays, Dave Marshall -- okay, that's 21 out of 25; missing Jim McAndrew, George Theodore, Jim Beauchamp, and Ken Boswell). Prince can. He can also describe exactly what he was doing while watching Game 6 of the 1986 NLCS (of course, so can I: sitting in the Flatiron Building, listening to the game on weak-signaled WHN -- St. Martin's Press didn't have any televisions at that point -- with my friends and co-workers George, Jack, Janet, Lincoln, and Stuart until they won around 8 PM that night). And where he was in 1977 when the Mets traded Tom Seaver (I was watching Channel 4 news and listening to the radio mournfully). And so on.
Okay, I'm probably as much of a Mets nut as Greg Prince is. And this was fun to read as a result, and I'd recommend it to most Met fans. Don't expect literature, but do imagine you've gotten a letter (albeit a really long letter) from a friend. Would it be fun for a non-Met fan? Probably not, although it might open some eyes. (At least a few Mets fans are going to read it, given I got my copy out of the library here in Naperville, IL.)
*****
National League Championship Series starts tomorrow night. I'll try to live blog the game.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Gary Thorne quoted Mets broadcaster Bob Murphy on ESPN Radio’s coverage of the Philadelphia-Colorado game last night, noting “Baseball is a game of redeeming features.” Try telling that to Troy Tulowitzki.
By most measures, Tulowitzki had an outstanding 2009. Recovering from an injury that took out part of his sophomore year, he hit .297 with an OPS of .929. He hit 32 home runs, drove in 97, and scored 101. And he made just nine errors in the field. With the injuries to the Mets’ Jose Reyes and the subpar years of Philadelphia’s Jimmy Rollins and Milwaukee’s J.J. Hardy, Tulowitzki is running neck-and-neck with the Florida Marlins’ Hanley Ramirez as the best shortstop in the National League.
But in the postseason – and especially yesterday’s Game 4 – Tulowitzki failed, and then couldn’t redeem himself. In the sixth inning of last night’s NLDS game, Tulowitzki was on second base after doubling in Todd Helton to cut the Phillies’ lead to 2-1. He was also running at the crack of the bat, even though there was one out. Unfortunately, Garrett Atkins hit a line drive to third baseman Pedro Feliz, and Tulowitzki was doubled off to end the inning.
Not good, of course. But baseball is a game of redeeming features, and Tulowitzki would have two opportunities to redeem himself. Unfortunately for him, he was unable to do so – flying out in the eighth inning with runners on first and second base, and striking out to end the game in the ninth inning, also with runners at first and second.
It was a tough series for the Rockies. They made mistakes. (So did the umpires, as they later admitted Chase Utley’s “hit” during the Phillies’ ninth inning rally should have been called a foul ball.) Closer Huston Street, who converted 35 of 37 save opportunities during the regular season, was unable to close both Games 3 and 4 in the playoffs. Both Tulowitzki and Street will have months to think about what they could have done. (Street’s defeats were both at the hands of Ryan Howard, who’s beaten a lot of pitchers over the last few years.)
Colorado has a young and improving team. Manager Jim Tracy, after doing a so-so job running the Dodgers and a lousy job with the Pittsburgh Pirates (not that he’s in exclusive company there), took over for Clint Hurdle partway through the season and brought them into the playoffs. They have turned a corner, realizing that just because they play in Denver, they should just stock up on sluggers and ignore the pitching. They have a loyal fan base, a marvelous stadium (I’ve never seen a game there, but I went to the park when we visited Denver in November 2001), and an area that should attract baseball talent. Things are looking up.
Just not this morning.
*****
No baseball for a couple of days. The National League Championship Series will start Thursday night in Los Angeles, with TBS broadcasting the games. The next day, the Yankees and Anaheim Angels Who Claim They’re From Los Angeles start up on Fox (of course). There will apparently only be three days with two games (this Friday, Monday the 19th, and the following Saturday) – that way, the postseason can continue all the way until early November!
*****
Nice job by ESPN Radio announcers Gary Thorne and Chris Singleton on Game 4 of the NLDS (oddly, ESPN Radio apparently had Chris Berman and Rick Sutcliffe on first two Colorado-Philadelphia games – maybe Berman doesn’t like heights or something). Thorne was a radio broadcaster for the New York Mets for a few years in the mid-1980s, but left because there were conflicts between him doing baseball and New Jersey Devils hockey. He now works primarily for ESPN Radio, although he also does Baltimore Oriole cable broadcasts as well. Met fans hated to see him go (although Gary Cohen, his replacement, is among the best broadcasters out there), but he’s achieved a lot of success with ESPN. It was nice to hear him name-check Bob Murphy last night, as Murphy was primarily known only in New York.
Chris Singleton is an interesting story. He was an average player for a few years with the White Sox and Orioles, but then had some ear problems and wound up out of the game at age 32. He was then hired to be the second voice in the Chicago White Sox radio booth, teaming up with Ed Farmer to replace John Rooney (who left the Sox after a salary dispute). To be kind about it, Farmer didn’t mix well with Singleton; putting it more bluntly, Farmer treated Singleton poorly on the air. Singleton is reasonably well informed and comes up with some good observations, but not surprisingly, on the first year or two on the job he was a little raw, and Farmer was no help at all, sometimes interrupting Singleton’s observations or simply ignoring what he’d said rather than striking up a conversation. After two years, Steve Stone (who had done Cubs games for a number of years) became available, so Singleton, reading the handwriting on the wall, moved over to ESPN, where he’s been a pretty good fit.
ESPN’s doing a decent job of developing baseball color analysts – Aaron Boone (who’s still playing), Rick Sutcliffe, and a few others have done well. (Steve Phillips, on the other hand, has taken a long time for me to warm up to. Of course, I may be blaming him for his tenure as Mets general manager.) The problem, with a few exceptions, is there’s nowhere for them to go from there – very few former players have been able to transition to other sports. (Anyone remember Tim McCarver doing Winter Olympic coverage for CBS in 1992? Didn’t think so.) Maybe ESPN can bring back Sports Challenge one more time to give these guys something to do in the off-season.
Photo Credit: Jeff Gross, Getty Images, originally from about.com.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Sunday Thoughts
I didn't catch a minute of the Philadelphia-Colorado game last night. By the time it started (and the Yankees-Minnesota game was over) it was 9:30 Central time, and we were in bed -- my wife, Karen, is not really a baseball fan (that's putting it mildly), so I didn't want to put it on the television. And either WMVP radio (ESPN's radio station in Chicago) signed off of baseball after the previous game or turned down its power, because I couldn't pick up the game on the radio at all. Unfortunately, I missed a good game (not that I would have listened to all of it anyway); more unfortunately, another blown call played an important part in the game (more on that in a bit).
Here's my question: what genius at MLB decided starting the game at 10:07 PM Eastern Time would be a good idea? Especially when an east coast team like Philadelphia is involved; this means that virtually nobody under age 10 saw any of the game. And before anybody says, "But the kids should have the day off, since it's Columbus Day the next day," that assumes people actually have the day off (not everybody does -- I'm writing this from the office), and that parents will let their kids stay up much later for that purpose (I wouldn't; my six-year-old has lights out at 8 PM). If MLB is thinking this is the way to garner new fans, they couldn't be more wrong. (I suppose they're getting slightly smarter; when the League Championship Series first started in 1969, on at least one occasion the AL and NL games started at the same time, leaving NBC to decide which to broadcast.)
So, I propose to MLB the following:
- No more than three games on any weekday (this seems to be the rule anyway).
- No start time later than 8:30 PM Eastern. This may mean some games may overlap, but they did last night anyway, so what difference does it make?
- Game times have to be flexible. I understand the logic for yesterday -- Boston vs. Angels had to start at 1 PM because the New England Patriots were playing the 4 PM game; New Englanders don't want to be paralyzed by the choices and the big, bad NFL will never move a game themselves unless they start getting negative press. And, understandably, the Red Sox were getting sick of being the 10 PM Eastern start when they were in California. So that was locked in. Likewise, the Philadelphia-Colorado game had to be the late game because the Denver Broncos was playing against the Patriots in that same 4 PM game. But did the Yankees-Minnesota have to start at 7 Eastern? It's Sunday night, everybody's at home watching sports anyway, the New York Giants and Minnesota Vikings both played 1 PM games and the Jets play tonight (oh, and if the Twins had won yesterday, you can bet a Yankees-Minnesota Game 4 would have run right up against the New York Jets and Miami Dolphins). The Yankees-Minnesota game should have started at 5:30 Eastern last night, which would have allowed the Philadelphia-Colorado game to start at 8:30, allowing the kids to at least catch the first three innings or so.
If TBS doesn't like this, well, they're hereby invited to bite me. Another network that understands the game a bit better (ahem, ESPN) can take over.
*****
Hated to see the Twins go out that way, but they're probably very happy they made it to the postseason in the first place without Justin Morneau and with Jason Kubel going 0-for-13 with nine strikeouts. Without the two of them, they had virtually no power (Joe Mauer's an outstanding hitter, but he's not a slugger).
The baserunning gaffes in Games 2 and 3 didn't help, although neither could be defined as a gamebreaker. The Game 2 goof came earlier in the game, and showed that Carlos Gomez will never be the five-tool player Minnesota may have hoped (note to Mets fans: with Phil Humber stuck in AAA and the other two pitchers not in the majors, it's looking like the Johan Santana trade will be as much of a win as the Rick Aguilera and Kevin Tapani for a fading Frank Viola was a loss). On the other hand, Nick Punto is a smart baseball player, but he had a major brain cramp last night; he ran through a stop sign by his third base coach (which took me about five replays to see, until it occurred to someone at TBS to get rid of the ALDS logo that was blocking our view).
Next year the Twins will be playing outdoors again (hey, that ought to be fun in early April, huh?). I wonder if they'll still be wearing the Carl Pohlad arm patches -- I'm sure some in the city and with the team genuinely mourned his death, but Pohlad's seeming indifference toward his team (remember he offered up the Twins for contraction?) also carries some weight.
*****
So far we've had several games directly affected by the umpires blowing calls, to the point where folks are calling for instant replay in baseball as it is in football. Some of the calls were debatable (in the Detroit-Minnesota play-in game where a pitch grazed batter Brandon Inge's shirt, the home plate umpire was screened out), some were just plain blown (Phil Cuzzi completely and utterly missed the "foul" ball in Game 2 of the Yankees-Minnesota series even though he had an unobstructed view from 15 feet away; after he rang up a Twins hitter on a very questionable check swing yesterday, Chip Carey noted on TBS he's going to have a hard time reserving a table a restaurant in Minnesota for awhile). I didn't see last night's Philadelphia-Colorado game, so I can't judge that one.
I can see the logic of instant replay (I'm not a purist, I like getting the calls right), but the problem I can see is the slowdowns in the game (a pitcher doesn't want to be standing on the mound for five minutes doing nothing while a replay official stares at eight angles) and that no equivalent giveback to a timeout if "replay challenge" is instituted like it is in football. Suggestions welcome.
*****
Best line of the day: Dave Campbell, on ESPN radio, when a pitcher threw a breaking ball for strike three after a series of fastballs: "When you're looking for a 99-mile-an-hour pitch and you get Mr. Snappy instead…" Mr. Snappy. I'll have to remember that.
Here's my question: what genius at MLB decided starting the game at 10:07 PM Eastern Time would be a good idea? Especially when an east coast team like Philadelphia is involved; this means that virtually nobody under age 10 saw any of the game. And before anybody says, "But the kids should have the day off, since it's Columbus Day the next day," that assumes people actually have the day off (not everybody does -- I'm writing this from the office), and that parents will let their kids stay up much later for that purpose (I wouldn't; my six-year-old has lights out at 8 PM). If MLB is thinking this is the way to garner new fans, they couldn't be more wrong. (I suppose they're getting slightly smarter; when the League Championship Series first started in 1969, on at least one occasion the AL and NL games started at the same time, leaving NBC to decide which to broadcast.)
So, I propose to MLB the following:
- No more than three games on any weekday (this seems to be the rule anyway).
- No start time later than 8:30 PM Eastern. This may mean some games may overlap, but they did last night anyway, so what difference does it make?
- Game times have to be flexible. I understand the logic for yesterday -- Boston vs. Angels had to start at 1 PM because the New England Patriots were playing the 4 PM game; New Englanders don't want to be paralyzed by the choices and the big, bad NFL will never move a game themselves unless they start getting negative press. And, understandably, the Red Sox were getting sick of being the 10 PM Eastern start when they were in California. So that was locked in. Likewise, the Philadelphia-Colorado game had to be the late game because the Denver Broncos was playing against the Patriots in that same 4 PM game. But did the Yankees-Minnesota have to start at 7 Eastern? It's Sunday night, everybody's at home watching sports anyway, the New York Giants and Minnesota Vikings both played 1 PM games and the Jets play tonight (oh, and if the Twins had won yesterday, you can bet a Yankees-Minnesota Game 4 would have run right up against the New York Jets and Miami Dolphins). The Yankees-Minnesota game should have started at 5:30 Eastern last night, which would have allowed the Philadelphia-Colorado game to start at 8:30, allowing the kids to at least catch the first three innings or so.
If TBS doesn't like this, well, they're hereby invited to bite me. Another network that understands the game a bit better (ahem, ESPN) can take over.
*****
Hated to see the Twins go out that way, but they're probably very happy they made it to the postseason in the first place without Justin Morneau and with Jason Kubel going 0-for-13 with nine strikeouts. Without the two of them, they had virtually no power (Joe Mauer's an outstanding hitter, but he's not a slugger).
The baserunning gaffes in Games 2 and 3 didn't help, although neither could be defined as a gamebreaker. The Game 2 goof came earlier in the game, and showed that Carlos Gomez will never be the five-tool player Minnesota may have hoped (note to Mets fans: with Phil Humber stuck in AAA and the other two pitchers not in the majors, it's looking like the Johan Santana trade will be as much of a win as the Rick Aguilera and Kevin Tapani for a fading Frank Viola was a loss). On the other hand, Nick Punto is a smart baseball player, but he had a major brain cramp last night; he ran through a stop sign by his third base coach (which took me about five replays to see, until it occurred to someone at TBS to get rid of the ALDS logo that was blocking our view).
Next year the Twins will be playing outdoors again (hey, that ought to be fun in early April, huh?). I wonder if they'll still be wearing the Carl Pohlad arm patches -- I'm sure some in the city and with the team genuinely mourned his death, but Pohlad's seeming indifference toward his team (remember he offered up the Twins for contraction?) also carries some weight.
*****
So far we've had several games directly affected by the umpires blowing calls, to the point where folks are calling for instant replay in baseball as it is in football. Some of the calls were debatable (in the Detroit-Minnesota play-in game where a pitch grazed batter Brandon Inge's shirt, the home plate umpire was screened out), some were just plain blown (Phil Cuzzi completely and utterly missed the "foul" ball in Game 2 of the Yankees-Minnesota series even though he had an unobstructed view from 15 feet away; after he rang up a Twins hitter on a very questionable check swing yesterday, Chip Carey noted on TBS he's going to have a hard time reserving a table a restaurant in Minnesota for awhile). I didn't see last night's Philadelphia-Colorado game, so I can't judge that one.
I can see the logic of instant replay (I'm not a purist, I like getting the calls right), but the problem I can see is the slowdowns in the game (a pitcher doesn't want to be standing on the mound for five minutes doing nothing while a replay official stares at eight angles) and that no equivalent giveback to a timeout if "replay challenge" is instituted like it is in football. Suggestions welcome.
*****
Best line of the day: Dave Campbell, on ESPN radio, when a pitcher threw a breaking ball for strike three after a series of fastballs: "When you're looking for a 99-mile-an-hour pitch and you get Mr. Snappy instead…" Mr. Snappy. I'll have to remember that.
Credit: The above picture originally appeared in today's New York Daily News and was taken by Barbara Antonelli.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
I have a rule when it comes to sports: family first. So I didn't watch any of the Red Sox-Angels game today, and only listened to bits and pieces of it. And when the Angels made their great comeback today against Billy Wagner and Jonathan Paplebon -- well, I was in an antique store with my son, Danny. (By the way, six-year-olds and antique stores don't mix well, especially when you don't allow him to touch anything. However, that ensures no breakage.)
This was a series I didn't want to see either team lose. I like teams with a plan, with a history of success and humility, and able to treat their players past and present well, and the Angels and Red Sox have done very well using those measuring rods the last decade. The Angels have had a difficult time of it this year with the death of their young pitcher, Nick Adenhart, in a drunk-driving accident (he was not driving; he was plowed into by a drunk driver -- the case hasn't gone to trial yet). I'd certainly root for them to beat the Yankees -- of course, I can't think of a team I wouldn't root for against the Yankees.
*****
Well, here's one, maybe. Now that the Cardinals are out, Tony LaRussa and Dave Duncan are being a little coy about their plans for next year. (CBS Sports has more: http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/story/12347467). I understand Duncan's ticked off that his son was traded, but that's the way things go in sports (talk to Felipe Alou about Moises getting dealt away sometime). Phil Rogers of The Chicago Tribune was floating the idea that Dusty Baker is going to get fired and LaRussa and Duncan would be brought in to take their place. I can see Baker getting canned, but I can't see LaRussa (who's now 65) and Duncan (64) moving to Cincinnati at this point, even if their pal Walt Jocketty is now the GM. The franchise doesn't have the backing of the city like St. Louis does (several players have taken smaller contracts for the chance to play in such a supportive environment), and Cincinnati doesn't have the talent in place yet. I don't care for LaRussa (who I find monumentally eogtistical) and Duncan (who has had a reasonable amount of success in finding talent in veterans where there was none, but has never been good at bringing up pitchers through the system without messing up their arms in the process), so that may be clouding my opinion.
This was a series I didn't want to see either team lose. I like teams with a plan, with a history of success and humility, and able to treat their players past and present well, and the Angels and Red Sox have done very well using those measuring rods the last decade. The Angels have had a difficult time of it this year with the death of their young pitcher, Nick Adenhart, in a drunk-driving accident (he was not driving; he was plowed into by a drunk driver -- the case hasn't gone to trial yet). I'd certainly root for them to beat the Yankees -- of course, I can't think of a team I wouldn't root for against the Yankees.
*****
Well, here's one, maybe. Now that the Cardinals are out, Tony LaRussa and Dave Duncan are being a little coy about their plans for next year. (CBS Sports has more: http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/story/12347467). I understand Duncan's ticked off that his son was traded, but that's the way things go in sports (talk to Felipe Alou about Moises getting dealt away sometime). Phil Rogers of The Chicago Tribune was floating the idea that Dusty Baker is going to get fired and LaRussa and Duncan would be brought in to take their place. I can see Baker getting canned, but I can't see LaRussa (who's now 65) and Duncan (64) moving to Cincinnati at this point, even if their pal Walt Jocketty is now the GM. The franchise doesn't have the backing of the city like St. Louis does (several players have taken smaller contracts for the chance to play in such a supportive environment), and Cincinnati doesn't have the talent in place yet. I don't care for LaRussa (who I find monumentally eogtistical) and Duncan (who has had a reasonable amount of success in finding talent in veterans where there was none, but has never been good at bringing up pitchers through the system without messing up their arms in the process), so that may be clouding my opinion.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
First Post
Over seven years after starting a blog, I'm starting another. This one is dedicated solely to my favorite sport, baseball. (Note not favorite pastime: that would be either playing with my son or eating Cheez-Its.)
I've been thinking about doing this for quite some time. My original plan was to write about baseball and football, but (1) baseball is quite enough for one blog, (2) I love watching football but can't explain it very well. And after picking up and reading a big of Faith and Fear in Flushing, by a Mets blogger, I realized anyone can write this if they can construct a sentence reasonably well.
I'm a lifelong Mets fan, but I now live in suburban Illinois. Which is fine, because we have three teams to follow: the Cubs and White Sox, of course, and the Milwaukee Brewers are just an hour and a half away. (In fact, the last two MLB games I've gone to were both Brewer games. It's a great stadium.)
After browsing through books by Bill James, Tom Boswell, and Roger Angell, I chose the name The Eleventh Inning because that's a make-or-break time in a baseball game. If you're tied after nine innings, no big deal, everybody can go another inning. By the eleventh, it's a game of attrition. At least one manager is out of bench players (or only has the catcher left); relief pitchers start to go two or three innings instead of one batter, or sometimes a starter will come in. The eleventh inning separates the men from the boys. Or the men from the Men, as the case may be.
Strange time to start, I know, but I'll be writing during the offseason as well.
Thanks for reading.
I've been thinking about doing this for quite some time. My original plan was to write about baseball and football, but (1) baseball is quite enough for one blog, (2) I love watching football but can't explain it very well. And after picking up and reading a big of Faith and Fear in Flushing, by a Mets blogger, I realized anyone can write this if they can construct a sentence reasonably well.
I'm a lifelong Mets fan, but I now live in suburban Illinois. Which is fine, because we have three teams to follow: the Cubs and White Sox, of course, and the Milwaukee Brewers are just an hour and a half away. (In fact, the last two MLB games I've gone to were both Brewer games. It's a great stadium.)
After browsing through books by Bill James, Tom Boswell, and Roger Angell, I chose the name The Eleventh Inning because that's a make-or-break time in a baseball game. If you're tied after nine innings, no big deal, everybody can go another inning. By the eleventh, it's a game of attrition. At least one manager is out of bench players (or only has the catcher left); relief pitchers start to go two or three innings instead of one batter, or sometimes a starter will come in. The eleventh inning separates the men from the boys. Or the men from the Men, as the case may be.
Strange time to start, I know, but I'll be writing during the offseason as well.
Thanks for reading.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)