Two big deals were made for the bay area teams this week: Aaron Rowand was signed by the Giants and Dan Haren was traded to the Diamondbacks. I like both of these deals, and I'll outline them separately.
First Aaron Rowand. Aaron Rowand is a gold-glove caliber Center Fielder, who will probably get just over 20 home runs, 10 stolen bases, and a high .280 BA. Aaron Rowand strikes me as a great #5 hitter, who will probably bat cleanup for the Giants pending a later addition. What excites me about this trade in particular is that this is the kind of signing the Giants need: Good glove run producers that don't involve giving up Lincecum or Cain.
If the Giants are going to have any success this year it's going to be "Lincecum and Cain and pray for Rain" (like Spahn and Sain.) It's going to be a team built around starting pitching, backed by Zito, Lowry, and either Sanchez or Correia. If the Giants could produce runs, they have three Starting Pitchers there perfectly capable of over 15 wins, and even Lowry could Joe Blanton his way into a 15 win season. What we need now is another run producer to hit in those 3-4-5 slots. The thought keeps going through my mind of Pat Burrell, as Brian Sabean likes trading for old guys who have strong second halfs, and he wouldn't be terrible.
Now on to Haren. The reports said that Beane would evaluate his plans after Wednesday's health meetings, and apparently they went poorly. Haren was traded to the Diamondbacks for six prospects, one of which is skill-wise an Outfield equivalent of Daric Barton. This is definitely a move for years to come--As one could argue that the A's traded their best player for nothing that's a sure deal. Much like the Tigers/Marlins trade a while ago, the A's basically revamped their whole Minor League system with this trade.
I like this too. It's good for the D-Backs as they obviously got a proven ace (to back up the amazing Brandon Webb) without taking a single piece off their 25 man roster. The A's now have a plan for working towards the new stadium, and anybody who isn't signed for 2011 has a future up in the air. Catfish Stew had a helpful chart to explain who that is, and I think Mark Ellis and Huston Street are the most probable to be traded. Ellis is basically Placido Polanco with less average and slightly more pop, and Street when on is one of the top closers in the league. I anticipate Beane will keep working on Rich Harden and Mark Kotsay until they have a good spurt, then push the trade button while the value is still something. He can't really get anything for the two of them, but if he can get 6 or 7 quality starts without injury from Harden, he could probably convince somebody that Harden is finally the pitcher we've hoped he would be.
So here we have the Giants making a move to make them not awful, and the A's making a move which places them basically out of contention for 2008. With the Angels having the same team as last year + Torri Hunter and Jon Garland but -Orlando Cabrera, and the A's having the same team but Joe Blanton as their ace, the outlook is dim. Wild Card looks dim too since they'll be battling the Yankees and Indians (having lost their spot to the now ridiculous Tigers.) Look for the Giants to place (not too distantly) 5th in the NL west again, but mostly because of the fact that the NL West is going to be the strongest division in the NL. As for the A's...look for them to fight the Mariners for 2nd in the AL west, mostly because the AL West is going to be the weakest division in the AL (outside of the Angels.)
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Mitchell Report craziness
http://deadspin.com/sports/the-official-list/the-complete-list-of-players-mentioned-in-the-mitchell-report-333634.php
I'll give you a moment to look at that, it's the official list of people mentioned in the Mitchell Report on steroids in baseball.
In addition to Barry Bonds for the Giants. A's fans got hit with Jack Cust, and Red Sox suffered only the recently departed Eric Gagne. Roger Clemens also joins the list of "old timers who apparently got the little kick they needed to come back." Both of those names make sense--Cust a perennial minor leaguer who needed just a little oomph to make the show, and Gagz a former great who needed to regain his old form.
It will be interesting to see how this develops, but George Mitchell emphasized in his press conference that he thinks players should not be punished for past crimes. Baseball needs to look to the future, and if we keep ourselves in the past, we will never move forward.
I'm amidst studying for my last two finals, so I apologize for the brief entry. I will respond to any and all comments though.
I'll give you a moment to look at that, it's the official list of people mentioned in the Mitchell Report on steroids in baseball.
In addition to Barry Bonds for the Giants. A's fans got hit with Jack Cust, and Red Sox suffered only the recently departed Eric Gagne. Roger Clemens also joins the list of "old timers who apparently got the little kick they needed to come back." Both of those names make sense--Cust a perennial minor leaguer who needed just a little oomph to make the show, and Gagz a former great who needed to regain his old form.
It will be interesting to see how this develops, but George Mitchell emphasized in his press conference that he thinks players should not be punished for past crimes. Baseball needs to look to the future, and if we keep ourselves in the past, we will never move forward.
I'm amidst studying for my last two finals, so I apologize for the brief entry. I will respond to any and all comments though.
Monday, December 10, 2007
Bonds Buzz: Part Deux
My last entry has gotten me thinking more about Bonds, and how many reports about the A's signing him have surfaced. This creates an interesting dichotomy in myself and many A's fans. A lot of us are big Bonds haters, and what interests me is how the fans will react to a Barry signing. A few things to think about:
1) Barry fans will start migrating to the Coliseum. I've always thought there are a number of fans who follow the Giants because they want to see Barry play. There's nothing wrong with that--if I'm going to casually follow a sport, I'd like to see the best current example of superior play when I do watch. Without Barry, there isn't much draw to watch the Giants play currently. If Sabean actually does dump Cain and Lincecum like the trade rumors seem to say, then there will be even less draw to Pac Bell Park then ever. The A's will see a rise in attendance regardless.
2) Adding Barry to the lineup makes everyone on the team better. How? Barry still gets walked an abnormal amount in games. In 2001, the year Barry hit 73 Home runs, he was walked 177 times in 153 games. Last year, in only 126 games he was walked 132 times. That's still more than a walk every game. If Barry gets up with a man on 2nd, and the opposing teams walk Barry, suddenly there's two men on with Jack Cust on rather than 1 man. Barry actually fits the moneyball mold--he gets on base and he can hit for power. I think his price will be pretty low too, since most cities are afraid to touch him.
3) Most cities in this situation tend to turn their attitudes around with success. Boston hated Randy Moss as much as anyone until he signed with them and is now approaching Jerry Rice's single season TD record as a receiver. While Oakland fans are known for being crazy jerks, Boston fans, I imagine, are just as opinionated. I think if Barry does sign, the fans will turn (assuming he plays well.)
4) There's no guarantee he'll be a jerk. Barry kept his mouth pretty well shut last year amidst a lot of stuff, and there's a good chance that with the steroid scandals recently, Barry will be more motivated then ever to let his talent speak for itself. Barry is in it this year to get his 3,00th hit, one of the few milestones he hasn't gotten to, and let it be done.
File this under scandals that I'd like to see happen just to see the reaction among sports, but this is also exactly the type of bargain that Beane loves. Nobody else will touch the guy, so he's an amazing talent just waiting to bust it open for the Green and Gold. While one may saw that there's no place for him (Jack Cust does about the same thing,) Barry plays marginally better defense than Cust, so he can still platoon the Left Field/DH spot with Cust as designated by Barry's health. Barring some big legal developments, I see this trade as very feasible.
1) Barry fans will start migrating to the Coliseum. I've always thought there are a number of fans who follow the Giants because they want to see Barry play. There's nothing wrong with that--if I'm going to casually follow a sport, I'd like to see the best current example of superior play when I do watch. Without Barry, there isn't much draw to watch the Giants play currently. If Sabean actually does dump Cain and Lincecum like the trade rumors seem to say, then there will be even less draw to Pac Bell Park then ever. The A's will see a rise in attendance regardless.
2) Adding Barry to the lineup makes everyone on the team better. How? Barry still gets walked an abnormal amount in games. In 2001, the year Barry hit 73 Home runs, he was walked 177 times in 153 games. Last year, in only 126 games he was walked 132 times. That's still more than a walk every game. If Barry gets up with a man on 2nd, and the opposing teams walk Barry, suddenly there's two men on with Jack Cust on rather than 1 man. Barry actually fits the moneyball mold--he gets on base and he can hit for power. I think his price will be pretty low too, since most cities are afraid to touch him.
3) Most cities in this situation tend to turn their attitudes around with success. Boston hated Randy Moss as much as anyone until he signed with them and is now approaching Jerry Rice's single season TD record as a receiver. While Oakland fans are known for being crazy jerks, Boston fans, I imagine, are just as opinionated. I think if Barry does sign, the fans will turn (assuming he plays well.)
4) There's no guarantee he'll be a jerk. Barry kept his mouth pretty well shut last year amidst a lot of stuff, and there's a good chance that with the steroid scandals recently, Barry will be more motivated then ever to let his talent speak for itself. Barry is in it this year to get his 3,00th hit, one of the few milestones he hasn't gotten to, and let it be done.
File this under scandals that I'd like to see happen just to see the reaction among sports, but this is also exactly the type of bargain that Beane loves. Nobody else will touch the guy, so he's an amazing talent just waiting to bust it open for the Green and Gold. While one may saw that there's no place for him (Jack Cust does about the same thing,) Barry plays marginally better defense than Cust, so he can still platoon the Left Field/DH spot with Cust as designated by Barry's health. Barring some big legal developments, I see this trade as very feasible.
Saturday, December 8, 2007
Bonds Buzz
And so the witch hunt turns its eyes towards the Morgan Le Fay of the Steroids world, Barry Bonds. Bonds pleaded not guilty to his 19 counts of perjury and obstruction, and was released on half a million bond, to be paid only if he is found guilty. He has free travel just in case he signs again and needs to go to Toronto or even Japan. He's due back in February, for either the first court date or for a possible dismissal hearing if his lawyers conclude that the case is a crock.
What does this mean? Not much, really. We'll have to wait and see what the prosecution comes up with to bring this case against Bonds. The leading argument is that they have to have some whistle blower who saw Bonds himself shoot up with steroids, and is willing to testify to that extent. It's hard to believe that they would bring a case against Bonds without something that solid, since one has to assume that Bonds is going to be represented by some of the best in the business.
What really interests me is how this shows sports to be full circle in this country. Bonds isn't on trial for using steroids here, he's on trial for supposedly lying to the court. I don't think anyone would argue that it's pretty much a masked evolution from the steroids hearings though. People demand to know whether or not Bonds used so much that they're tying our already crowded court system with this. What's interesting is that, even if Bonds did use steroids, he still hasn't violated any laws of the time in question. The first steroid policy, instituted in 2002, would only lead to treatment of the player, and that player would even remain anonymous. The suspension policy wasn't administered until 2005. Bonds set the single season Home Run record in 2001.
Let me share a story with you. When I was in 4th grade, I won a ticket selling contest with my friend Trevor. The top 10 kids in the Foster City Little League who sold tickets to a giants game earned the chance to go onto the field before a Giants game and get autographs. It was a great day. Stan Javier broke a bat in practice and gave it to me (I still have it in my room at my Parents' house.) I got every Giants player's autograph (even some coaches, I'm looking at you Wendell Kim) except Bonds. Bonds sneaked into the dugout while we were entranced with Shawon Dunston. Since then, I've always had somewhat of a personal vendetta against the Barry.
I really don't like Bonds--he's a jerk, self-centered, and an egotist. Even with that, I still feel this whole thing is silly. Barry Bonds is one of (if not the best) player to ever play the game. His records are ridiculous, one only needs to look at his wikipedia page to determine whether his stats are hall of fame worthy. Bonds is on trial here because the country wants to put his face on an era which they deem as unworthy. This country loves controversy, and they'd love to see the media-hating, self-centered Barry Bonds go down as the icon of a generation which we should forget about. But that isn't fair to Barry.
Even if Barry did use steroids (which hasn't been proven yet,) that only puts him in a group that may be as high as 85% if we are to believe what Jose Canseco says. I think the country needs to take this era for what it is. Players are going to get better with time--what makes certain players great will be analyzed, broken down, and taught with time, so that future players can harness that skill.
I'll give another example. Let's say it turns out that Daisuke does indeed throw a Gyroball, and comes into next season and blows everyone away with this mystery pitch. He dominates multiple seasons with it, and wins five consecutive Cy Young awards, cementing himself as one of the best pitchers ever. Eventually, people will figure out how to throw the Gyroball, and it will become a staple of the game. Daisuke's records will eventually be broken by someone who knows the Gyroball, the Slurve, and some other pitch that only they know, only for that to be broken by another newcomer who can learn it.
See where I'm going with this? I think Barry's success is more likely attributed to the fact that he's a hell of an athlete who has learned from greats such as Mays and Aaron, and harnessed the techniques that made them so dominant. America needs to stop trying to pin him up as the demon of steroids, and just accept him as a great player. His records will eventually be broken (barring some major change in the game, i.e. the banning of the spitball,) and America will move on.
What does this mean? Not much, really. We'll have to wait and see what the prosecution comes up with to bring this case against Bonds. The leading argument is that they have to have some whistle blower who saw Bonds himself shoot up with steroids, and is willing to testify to that extent. It's hard to believe that they would bring a case against Bonds without something that solid, since one has to assume that Bonds is going to be represented by some of the best in the business.
What really interests me is how this shows sports to be full circle in this country. Bonds isn't on trial for using steroids here, he's on trial for supposedly lying to the court. I don't think anyone would argue that it's pretty much a masked evolution from the steroids hearings though. People demand to know whether or not Bonds used so much that they're tying our already crowded court system with this. What's interesting is that, even if Bonds did use steroids, he still hasn't violated any laws of the time in question. The first steroid policy, instituted in 2002, would only lead to treatment of the player, and that player would even remain anonymous. The suspension policy wasn't administered until 2005. Bonds set the single season Home Run record in 2001.
Let me share a story with you. When I was in 4th grade, I won a ticket selling contest with my friend Trevor. The top 10 kids in the Foster City Little League who sold tickets to a giants game earned the chance to go onto the field before a Giants game and get autographs. It was a great day. Stan Javier broke a bat in practice and gave it to me (I still have it in my room at my Parents' house.) I got every Giants player's autograph (even some coaches, I'm looking at you Wendell Kim) except Bonds. Bonds sneaked into the dugout while we were entranced with Shawon Dunston. Since then, I've always had somewhat of a personal vendetta against the Barry.
I really don't like Bonds--he's a jerk, self-centered, and an egotist. Even with that, I still feel this whole thing is silly. Barry Bonds is one of (if not the best) player to ever play the game. His records are ridiculous, one only needs to look at his wikipedia page to determine whether his stats are hall of fame worthy. Bonds is on trial here because the country wants to put his face on an era which they deem as unworthy. This country loves controversy, and they'd love to see the media-hating, self-centered Barry Bonds go down as the icon of a generation which we should forget about. But that isn't fair to Barry.
Even if Barry did use steroids (which hasn't been proven yet,) that only puts him in a group that may be as high as 85% if we are to believe what Jose Canseco says. I think the country needs to take this era for what it is. Players are going to get better with time--what makes certain players great will be analyzed, broken down, and taught with time, so that future players can harness that skill.
I'll give another example. Let's say it turns out that Daisuke does indeed throw a Gyroball, and comes into next season and blows everyone away with this mystery pitch. He dominates multiple seasons with it, and wins five consecutive Cy Young awards, cementing himself as one of the best pitchers ever. Eventually, people will figure out how to throw the Gyroball, and it will become a staple of the game. Daisuke's records will eventually be broken by someone who knows the Gyroball, the Slurve, and some other pitch that only they know, only for that to be broken by another newcomer who can learn it.
See where I'm going with this? I think Barry's success is more likely attributed to the fact that he's a hell of an athlete who has learned from greats such as Mays and Aaron, and harnessed the techniques that made them so dominant. America needs to stop trying to pin him up as the demon of steroids, and just accept him as a great player. His records will eventually be broken (barring some major change in the game, i.e. the banning of the spitball,) and America will move on.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
Winter Meeting Musing
The Winter meetings are over, and the Tigers definitely came out on top. A team that was already among the top in offensive production and won the world series back in 05 added to its impressive roster a Miguel Cabrera and a Dontrelle Willis. What does this do to the Teeny Tigers that could? It makes them instant World Series contenders, if they weren't already.
Just loot at this lineup:
1) Curtis Granderson, CF. Remember how everyone thought it was so cool that MVP Jimmy Rollins had that crazy line of his of 20/20/20/20 (Home Runs/Doubles/Triples/Stolen Bases?) Yeah...Curtis Granderson did that too last year.
2) Placido Polanco, 2B. Finished with a .341 Batting Average and a (that's right folks) 1.000 Fielding Percentage. The man didn't make an error the entire season, and offensively was only topped at his position by Chase Utley.
3) Magiggilez Magoo, RF: He was also impressive, and the hands down 2nd place MVP in the AL short of A-Rod. He was the AL batting champion, 28 homers, and 139 RBI. He's hot stuff.
4) Miguel Cabrera, 3b: A 4 time all-star at the young age of 24, routinely rakes around 30 jacks and a 300+ BA. Some complain that he's getting chubby, but reports from the winter meetings say he's lost at least 15 pounds so far, and is determined to get back to prime condition.
5) Gary Sheffield, DH: I hear this guy's pretty good. A 9 time all star who, last year in one of his worst years, still hit 25 home runs for a .266 average, in just 133 games. Hell, he even stole 22 bases, 2nd most in his career.
6) Carlos "The Dwarf" Guillen, 1b: After being moved from SS to 1B near the end of last year, Guillen said he wouldn't be comfortable with the switch unless they hired someone good to replace him. Apparently Guillen was comfortable with Renteria, so don't expect any lingering discontent. Do expect another ~280, 20 home run season from Guillen, who will probably improve on his power due to him being 32 and moving into a less physically demanding defensive position.
7) Edgar Renteria, SS: Renteria, hit by the injury bug and limited to 124 games, still hit .332 with 12 homers and 11 sb in that time. Renteria hasn't had a history of injury, so expect a similar line through next year.
8) Pudge, C: You know your team is pretty good when an almost-lock Hall of Famer is batting 8th, not to mention Pete Rose's pick for best defensive catcher of all time. His production is waning, as he's hitting 37 this next year as a catcher, but he'll still hit around ~280 with at least 10 jacks in about 120-130 games.
9) The rest: The Left Field spot remains up for grabs, as Jacque Jones, Ryan Raburn, Marcus Thames and even Brandon Inge fight to not be traded and platoon for a role. These fellas are all solid, and would bat over 9th on most teams.
The only big question mark on the team is the bullpen. With both the setup man and the closer with over 4.00 ERAs, the Tigers need some help. Fortunately, they can trade 2 of the above 4 mentioned Left Field platooners for some middle relief help and not at all be hampered.
On another note, don't expect the A's to make any sort of a move until after Johan gets somewhere. Odds are that the Red Sox will rein him in eventually, at which point the Yankees will probably push hard for Haren, along with other SP deprived teams. Also expect Beane to look for a similar package to whatever Johan gets, since this is a really harsh Starting Pitcher Free Agent Market (it's depressing when Carlos Silva is the cream of the free agent crop.)
On a tertiary note, the Giants are inquiring about Hideki Matsui. This seems good. If the Giants could trade one of their Lincecum/Cain duo for Hideki Matsui and Jose Tabata, they should pull the trigger. Although I wouldn't trade straight up for Matsui (maybe Lowry or Jonathan Sanchez, but not just Lincecum/Cain,) these are the kind of lines Sabean should look towards for hitting.
Just loot at this lineup:
1) Curtis Granderson, CF. Remember how everyone thought it was so cool that MVP Jimmy Rollins had that crazy line of his of 20/20/20/20 (Home Runs/Doubles/Triples/Stolen Bases?) Yeah...Curtis Granderson did that too last year.
2) Placido Polanco, 2B. Finished with a .341 Batting Average and a (that's right folks) 1.000 Fielding Percentage. The man didn't make an error the entire season, and offensively was only topped at his position by Chase Utley.
3) Magiggilez Magoo, RF: He was also impressive, and the hands down 2nd place MVP in the AL short of A-Rod. He was the AL batting champion, 28 homers, and 139 RBI. He's hot stuff.
4) Miguel Cabrera, 3b: A 4 time all-star at the young age of 24, routinely rakes around 30 jacks and a 300+ BA. Some complain that he's getting chubby, but reports from the winter meetings say he's lost at least 15 pounds so far, and is determined to get back to prime condition.
5) Gary Sheffield, DH: I hear this guy's pretty good. A 9 time all star who, last year in one of his worst years, still hit 25 home runs for a .266 average, in just 133 games. Hell, he even stole 22 bases, 2nd most in his career.
6) Carlos "The Dwarf" Guillen, 1b: After being moved from SS to 1B near the end of last year, Guillen said he wouldn't be comfortable with the switch unless they hired someone good to replace him. Apparently Guillen was comfortable with Renteria, so don't expect any lingering discontent. Do expect another ~280, 20 home run season from Guillen, who will probably improve on his power due to him being 32 and moving into a less physically demanding defensive position.
7) Edgar Renteria, SS: Renteria, hit by the injury bug and limited to 124 games, still hit .332 with 12 homers and 11 sb in that time. Renteria hasn't had a history of injury, so expect a similar line through next year.
8) Pudge, C: You know your team is pretty good when an almost-lock Hall of Famer is batting 8th, not to mention Pete Rose's pick for best defensive catcher of all time. His production is waning, as he's hitting 37 this next year as a catcher, but he'll still hit around ~280 with at least 10 jacks in about 120-130 games.
9) The rest: The Left Field spot remains up for grabs, as Jacque Jones, Ryan Raburn, Marcus Thames and even Brandon Inge fight to not be traded and platoon for a role. These fellas are all solid, and would bat over 9th on most teams.
The only big question mark on the team is the bullpen. With both the setup man and the closer with over 4.00 ERAs, the Tigers need some help. Fortunately, they can trade 2 of the above 4 mentioned Left Field platooners for some middle relief help and not at all be hampered.
On another note, don't expect the A's to make any sort of a move until after Johan gets somewhere. Odds are that the Red Sox will rein him in eventually, at which point the Yankees will probably push hard for Haren, along with other SP deprived teams. Also expect Beane to look for a similar package to whatever Johan gets, since this is a really harsh Starting Pitcher Free Agent Market (it's depressing when Carlos Silva is the cream of the free agent crop.)
On a tertiary note, the Giants are inquiring about Hideki Matsui. This seems good. If the Giants could trade one of their Lincecum/Cain duo for Hideki Matsui and Jose Tabata, they should pull the trigger. Although I wouldn't trade straight up for Matsui (maybe Lowry or Jonathan Sanchez, but not just Lincecum/Cain,) these are the kind of lines Sabean should look towards for hitting.
Monday, December 3, 2007
Sides of the BCS Coin
For a long time, I thought the BCS was a sham. I was convinced that the mythical ranking system that the college football Gods used was flawed and didn't accurately a team's strength. I figured that if a team didn't lose a game, then there was no way that they should be ranked over teams with a loss, or even two. At the time I didn't understand the system. Nowadays people are saying that the BCS is showing its flaws more so than ever with its current rankings. Ironically, this season has lead me to appreciate at least the reasoning behind the BCS, if not the system itself.
When I hated the BCS, I didn't understand strength of schedule. I figured that schedules were picked at random among teams, like the NFL was. I didn't realize that schools schedule games between themselves, and that they have control over whom they face. With such a system in place, it's quite easy to establish a dominant schedule (Case in point, Hawaii this year.)
What does this mean? For such a league with an absurd amount of teams, one would think a complex mathematical polling system would have to be used to determine the best team. Since there's no way every team could play every other team, one has to rely on a ranking system based on stats accrued. The big deviation that people are clamoring for is a playoff system, where the season gets cut a few games short, and a 16 team playoff ensues over the course of 4 weeks. This seems good, but there must be a system in place like the BCS rankings to determine which 16 teams are worthy of the playoffs.
While fans make a large bruhaha about their team's rankings, it's important to remember that they have control over whom they play. If they want to establish themselves as the sure best team, they can play all the best teams in the league. Despite this, teams continue to schedule themselves against some of the best teams, and some of the worse teams, and as such the polling system I believe is the best direction to take. It's not perfect, but the system can always be changed, and as such I think College Football should stick with it until they get it right.
When I hated the BCS, I didn't understand strength of schedule. I figured that schedules were picked at random among teams, like the NFL was. I didn't realize that schools schedule games between themselves, and that they have control over whom they face. With such a system in place, it's quite easy to establish a dominant schedule (Case in point, Hawaii this year.)
What does this mean? For such a league with an absurd amount of teams, one would think a complex mathematical polling system would have to be used to determine the best team. Since there's no way every team could play every other team, one has to rely on a ranking system based on stats accrued. The big deviation that people are clamoring for is a playoff system, where the season gets cut a few games short, and a 16 team playoff ensues over the course of 4 weeks. This seems good, but there must be a system in place like the BCS rankings to determine which 16 teams are worthy of the playoffs.
While fans make a large bruhaha about their team's rankings, it's important to remember that they have control over whom they play. If they want to establish themselves as the sure best team, they can play all the best teams in the league. Despite this, teams continue to schedule themselves against some of the best teams, and some of the worse teams, and as such the polling system I believe is the best direction to take. It's not perfect, but the system can always be changed, and as such I think College Football should stick with it until they get it right.
Saturday, December 1, 2007
Patriots and Legacies
It seems almost imminent this year that the Patriots could become the first team since the 1972 Miami Dolphins go undefeated on the season. This would be quite a feat, since many sports fans weren't even sure if they were better than the reigning champion Indianapolis Colts, lead by the only man to advertise more products than Suzanne Somers, Peyton Manning. This leap in skill was accomplished through the signings of the best offensive free agent (Randy Moss) and the best defensive free agent (Adalius Thomas.) I'm rooting for the Patriots to do it. Not because I'm a Patriots fan (although Tom Brady went to a neighboring High School from mine,) but rather because I want to see the nation's reaction to it.
For those not in the know, Bill Belichick (the Patriots' coach) and the Patriots were fined earlier this year for Illegal Sideline Videotaping. What happened was that one of the Patriots' video assistants was caught taking video tapes of the New York Jets' defensive signals. Belichick was fined the league maximum of $500,000 and the Patriots were fined an additional $250,000 and a first round draft pick next year. There was a plethora of controversy about it, and has caused a lot of sneering and jeering towards the Patriots from the rest of the football fans.
Some critics have bounced back from this and said that this justifies the Patriots in a way. It's as if now the accusations are moot, since they're a dominating team without the videotaping. Almost like the Patriots are re-proving themselves to the world after being cast out. There's also talk that this season should be given a proverbial asterisk (much like the famed Barry Bonds asterisk) saying that they were under accusations for cheating for the year. It's a very similar argument, except there's that the Patriots were actually charged and fined, but (as of this writing) there isn't proof that Barry was juiced.
I'm personally under the opinion that the season needs to be forever remembered with the fine imposed. Belichick admitted to the case (although saying he misinterpreted the rules, and never actually used said videotape to an advantage.) What this means is that the season should be noted for its superiority, and the Patriots should be acknowledged for being a dominant team. That said, I think the fans need to be aware that they were fined for cheating, and that should be taken into consideration. This isn't meant to say that the team is a bunch of no talent hacks who cheated their way into the books, but rather that it is possible that underhanded means were used.
There's no way to literally "asterisk" this accomplishment in my opinion, since it's not as if the Football Hall of Fame will recognize a single season's team as entering the Hall of Fame, as Barry Bonds would be for breaking the record. Rather, I think that this season should be taken with a grain of salt amidst the controversy. The Patriots are a great football team, probably one of the best, but there may be a darker side to them.
Of course, this is all speculation, and the issue may not even come up if they lose a game. But regardless, it should be interesting to see this unravel about the same time that the Barry Bonds trial gets underway.
For those not in the know, Bill Belichick (the Patriots' coach) and the Patriots were fined earlier this year for Illegal Sideline Videotaping. What happened was that one of the Patriots' video assistants was caught taking video tapes of the New York Jets' defensive signals. Belichick was fined the league maximum of $500,000 and the Patriots were fined an additional $250,000 and a first round draft pick next year. There was a plethora of controversy about it, and has caused a lot of sneering and jeering towards the Patriots from the rest of the football fans.
Some critics have bounced back from this and said that this justifies the Patriots in a way. It's as if now the accusations are moot, since they're a dominating team without the videotaping. Almost like the Patriots are re-proving themselves to the world after being cast out. There's also talk that this season should be given a proverbial asterisk (much like the famed Barry Bonds asterisk) saying that they were under accusations for cheating for the year. It's a very similar argument, except there's that the Patriots were actually charged and fined, but (as of this writing) there isn't proof that Barry was juiced.
I'm personally under the opinion that the season needs to be forever remembered with the fine imposed. Belichick admitted to the case (although saying he misinterpreted the rules, and never actually used said videotape to an advantage.) What this means is that the season should be noted for its superiority, and the Patriots should be acknowledged for being a dominant team. That said, I think the fans need to be aware that they were fined for cheating, and that should be taken into consideration. This isn't meant to say that the team is a bunch of no talent hacks who cheated their way into the books, but rather that it is possible that underhanded means were used.
There's no way to literally "asterisk" this accomplishment in my opinion, since it's not as if the Football Hall of Fame will recognize a single season's team as entering the Hall of Fame, as Barry Bonds would be for breaking the record. Rather, I think that this season should be taken with a grain of salt amidst the controversy. The Patriots are a great football team, probably one of the best, but there may be a darker side to them.
Of course, this is all speculation, and the issue may not even come up if they lose a game. But regardless, it should be interesting to see this unravel about the same time that the Barry Bonds trial gets underway.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Japanese Influx and what to expect
So the Royals have signed Yasuhiko Yabuta, the Indians Masa Kobayashi, and there's a lot of talk about Hiroki Kuroda. Again MLB teams are turning to Japan in an effort to get pitching help in a thin free agent field. Here's a little of what to expect:
Japanese pitchers tend to be overvalued due to a different system. Starters in particular are prone to this. Japanese baseball runs 6 days a week, with a 6 man starting rotation. That means that Japanese pitchers tend to pitch once every 7 days instead of once every 5 or 6 days for American pitchers. This may not seem like a big deal, but over the course of an entire season it can mean a lot for a pitcher. Speaking of an entire season, they play less games in a season. Japanese Players play maximum 140 games in a season, with the two teams going directly to the world series rather than playoffs. This is probably the cause of Daisuke Matsuzaka's late season meltdown, and has been the case with many Japanese Pitchers.
Japanese baseball also uses a smaller ball, and pitch closer to the plate (albeit on a smaller mound.) And not to be stereotypical, but they pitch to less skilled batters in my opinion. I mean, Japan routinely imports players from the American Minor Leagues and they're stars. Leron Lee and Leroy Lee (Derrek Lee's father and uncle) were huge stars there, as are many perennial Minor Leaguers. This isn't because Americans are just better, but more because the MLB imports the best from everywhere else (Japan, Latin America, Canada, etc.)
What this does mean is that more and more Japanese teams and players are looking to work with American teams in order to fulfill their own monetary needs, as are the players. Ever since Hideo Nomo used the same loophole to get out of his obligations that Messersmith and McNally used to get out of their MLB contracts, the system has been getting closer and closer to embracing it. When Nomo originally did it, he was disowned by his family, and basically exiled from Japanese Baseball. Nowadays even when huge stars like Daisuke and Ichiro come over, the nation follows them with great interest, to see how their best perform among America's best.
I don't anticipate much from the new imports. I tend to like Japanese hitters more than pitchers for the aforementioned reasons, since they have proven they can beat a system that's a little slanted against them. Plus, none of these guys are hot prospects -- Kobayashi is 33, Yabuta is 34, and Kuroda is 32. While one may point to Takashi Saito as a foil to this theory, Saito, but Saito is better than these guys. Saito is a four time Japanese All-Star, with a fastball that's been clocked at 99 (the fastest of any MLB Japanese pitcher.) Look for these guys to be much like Hideki Okajima at best -- solid middle relievers, but not too much more.
Japanese pitchers tend to be overvalued due to a different system. Starters in particular are prone to this. Japanese baseball runs 6 days a week, with a 6 man starting rotation. That means that Japanese pitchers tend to pitch once every 7 days instead of once every 5 or 6 days for American pitchers. This may not seem like a big deal, but over the course of an entire season it can mean a lot for a pitcher. Speaking of an entire season, they play less games in a season. Japanese Players play maximum 140 games in a season, with the two teams going directly to the world series rather than playoffs. This is probably the cause of Daisuke Matsuzaka's late season meltdown, and has been the case with many Japanese Pitchers.
Japanese baseball also uses a smaller ball, and pitch closer to the plate (albeit on a smaller mound.) And not to be stereotypical, but they pitch to less skilled batters in my opinion. I mean, Japan routinely imports players from the American Minor Leagues and they're stars. Leron Lee and Leroy Lee (Derrek Lee's father and uncle) were huge stars there, as are many perennial Minor Leaguers. This isn't because Americans are just better, but more because the MLB imports the best from everywhere else (Japan, Latin America, Canada, etc.)
What this does mean is that more and more Japanese teams and players are looking to work with American teams in order to fulfill their own monetary needs, as are the players. Ever since Hideo Nomo used the same loophole to get out of his obligations that Messersmith and McNally used to get out of their MLB contracts, the system has been getting closer and closer to embracing it. When Nomo originally did it, he was disowned by his family, and basically exiled from Japanese Baseball. Nowadays even when huge stars like Daisuke and Ichiro come over, the nation follows them with great interest, to see how their best perform among America's best.
I don't anticipate much from the new imports. I tend to like Japanese hitters more than pitchers for the aforementioned reasons, since they have proven they can beat a system that's a little slanted against them. Plus, none of these guys are hot prospects -- Kobayashi is 33, Yabuta is 34, and Kuroda is 32. While one may point to Takashi Saito as a foil to this theory, Saito, but Saito is better than these guys. Saito is a four time Japanese All-Star, with a fastball that's been clocked at 99 (the fastest of any MLB Japanese pitcher.) Look for these guys to be much like Hideki Okajima at best -- solid middle relievers, but not too much more.
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Why Kashmir is better than Magic Man (Also Baseball talk)
Earlier this week the MVP for both leagues were announced. No surprise to anyone (except apparently the two ultra-homer Tiger writers who voted for Magglio Ordonez) that Alex Rodriguez was voted MVP in the AL. The bigger surprise was that Jimmy Rollins won the tightly contested race between himself and Matt Holliday for NL MVP. I'll lay out the case for both:
1) Going into the postseason, both players were figured to be a lock if they lead their respective teams (Phillies for Rollins and Rockies for Holliday) into the postseason. Nobody expected both teams to make such drastic comebacks as they did, and both ended up in the postseason, so this point is relatively moot. Mind you, these votes were cast just before the postseason started, so the Rockies going further into the postseason had no bearing on the voting. Kinda like voting for best dinner, but counting dessert in, when the voting is supposed to be based on the strength of the entrée.
2) Both players were centerpieces for their team. Jimmy Rollins made a quote back in January, being laughed at by most of baseball, saying that the Phillies were the team to beat in the NL East. Rollins held his end of the bargain, and became the first player ever to do 30/20/35/40 (home runs, triples, doubles, stolen bases respectively,) and to do it as a Shortstop is even more impressive. Not to mention he won the Gold Glove on defense. Matt Holliday on the other hand lead the league in Batting Average, hits, doubles, RBIs, Extra Base hits, Total bases, babies kissed, calls to Grandma, and probably a number of other categories, not to mention being in the top 3 in everything else.
The stats may be a bit intimidating to the untrained eye, but in my mind it boils down to this: Which is more valuable; a person who has better stats at an easier position (Matt Holliday as a left fielder) or a person with slightly worse stats at a harder position (Jimmy Rollins, playing Gold Glove defense on shortstop?) The key here for the argument is this: Rollins became the first person to accomplish that line of 30/20/35, impressive, but those stats have one thing in common: they are all extra base hits. Who lead the league in extra base hits? Matt Holliday.
3) This award is the Most Valuable Player. Last year's pick of Justin Morneau as the American League MVP shows that the voters place a good deal of emphasis on one's value to the success of their team. Justin Morneau was arguably not even the most valuable Minnesota Twin last year stat wise. He was teammate with the Cy Young winning Johan Santana and the batting champion Catcher Joe Mauer, both of whom probably had better years statistically. The difference here is that Justin Morneau's recovery from a bad start directly correlated with the team's success. If I could graph Morneau's success at the plate with the team's success in the win column, they would directly correlate.
So what does this mean to this year's NL MVP voting? One would think that, with two very worthy candidates, it would come down to one's value to their individual team. What makes the choice clear for me is that Matt Holliday played on a worse team. The Rockies finished last year tied with the Giants for last in the NL West. The Phillies in 2006 finished 85-77, 2nd in the NL East, having not placed last since 2000. The Rockies had to fight for a lot more, playing the majority of their games against NL west opponents rather than NL East opponents. Finally, the Rockies are a much, much worse team on paper. If Jimmy Rollins' bat fails, he still has 2006 MVP Ryan Howard, the best 2nd baseman in the mlb in Chase Utley, and All Star Centerfielder Aaron Rowand. If Matt Holliday has an off day, he has 5 time all star Todd Helton (never MVP, and older than Howard,) streak player of the century Kaz Matsui (infinitely worse than Chase Utley) and Rookie of the Year Troy Tulowitzki (a noble effort, but worse stat-wise in almost every category than Rowand.) Without Rollins, the Phillies had a much better chance to make the playoffs than a sans-Holliday Rockies.
I came up with an allusion the other day for the stat-impaired.. Comparing Jimmy Rollins with Matt Holliday is like comparing Heart to Led Zeppelin. Heart is an amazing band; Barracuda and Magic Man are both probably in my top 20 favorite songs of all time. They actually take a lot of their influence from Led Zeppelin though. I would argue that, despite the fact that Heart is a great band, they’re strictly worsethan Led Zeppelin. Zep has better vocals, guitar, bass, drums, and better songs as a whole. One might argue that Heart is more valuable to the rock world due to the fact that the lead singer and lead guitarist are females, and Led Zeppelin are all males, but I don’t think that has bearing on the product given out. Just as Heart should be evaluated on works, and not on circumstances, Rollins should be evaluated on stats, and not on positional relevance.
While I don't mean to diminish Rollins amazing season, I don't think he was better than Holliday. If Joe Mauer can't win the MVP for being the batting champion at a catcher position, then one would think that position bears little relevance in the MVP voting. Thus, I can't take the fact that Rollins is a middle infielder into much consideration when trying to establish solid voting guidelines. There is a flaw to be pointed out here with asking regional writers to vote for the award with no conceivable guidelines (How the hell did Carlos Marmol even get one third place vote?) Baseball Writers need to establish formal guidelines, or even better a formal debate Senate style, so that we the fans can understand what they're basing these awards on.
1) Going into the postseason, both players were figured to be a lock if they lead their respective teams (Phillies for Rollins and Rockies for Holliday) into the postseason. Nobody expected both teams to make such drastic comebacks as they did, and both ended up in the postseason, so this point is relatively moot. Mind you, these votes were cast just before the postseason started, so the Rockies going further into the postseason had no bearing on the voting. Kinda like voting for best dinner, but counting dessert in, when the voting is supposed to be based on the strength of the entrée.
2) Both players were centerpieces for their team. Jimmy Rollins made a quote back in January, being laughed at by most of baseball, saying that the Phillies were the team to beat in the NL East. Rollins held his end of the bargain, and became the first player ever to do 30/20/35/40 (home runs, triples, doubles, stolen bases respectively,) and to do it as a Shortstop is even more impressive. Not to mention he won the Gold Glove on defense. Matt Holliday on the other hand lead the league in Batting Average, hits, doubles, RBIs, Extra Base hits, Total bases, babies kissed, calls to Grandma, and probably a number of other categories, not to mention being in the top 3 in everything else.
The stats may be a bit intimidating to the untrained eye, but in my mind it boils down to this: Which is more valuable; a person who has better stats at an easier position (Matt Holliday as a left fielder) or a person with slightly worse stats at a harder position (Jimmy Rollins, playing Gold Glove defense on shortstop?) The key here for the argument is this: Rollins became the first person to accomplish that line of 30/20/35, impressive, but those stats have one thing in common: they are all extra base hits. Who lead the league in extra base hits? Matt Holliday.
3) This award is the Most Valuable Player. Last year's pick of Justin Morneau as the American League MVP shows that the voters place a good deal of emphasis on one's value to the success of their team. Justin Morneau was arguably not even the most valuable Minnesota Twin last year stat wise. He was teammate with the Cy Young winning Johan Santana and the batting champion Catcher Joe Mauer, both of whom probably had better years statistically. The difference here is that Justin Morneau's recovery from a bad start directly correlated with the team's success. If I could graph Morneau's success at the plate with the team's success in the win column, they would directly correlate.
So what does this mean to this year's NL MVP voting? One would think that, with two very worthy candidates, it would come down to one's value to their individual team. What makes the choice clear for me is that Matt Holliday played on a worse team. The Rockies finished last year tied with the Giants for last in the NL West. The Phillies in 2006 finished 85-77, 2nd in the NL East, having not placed last since 2000. The Rockies had to fight for a lot more, playing the majority of their games against NL west opponents rather than NL East opponents. Finally, the Rockies are a much, much worse team on paper. If Jimmy Rollins' bat fails, he still has 2006 MVP Ryan Howard, the best 2nd baseman in the mlb in Chase Utley, and All Star Centerfielder Aaron Rowand. If Matt Holliday has an off day, he has 5 time all star Todd Helton (never MVP, and older than Howard,) streak player of the century Kaz Matsui (infinitely worse than Chase Utley) and Rookie of the Year Troy Tulowitzki (a noble effort, but worse stat-wise in almost every category than Rowand.) Without Rollins, the Phillies had a much better chance to make the playoffs than a sans-Holliday Rockies.
I came up with an allusion the other day for the stat-impaired.. Comparing Jimmy Rollins with Matt Holliday is like comparing Heart to Led Zeppelin. Heart is an amazing band; Barracuda and Magic Man are both probably in my top 20 favorite songs of all time. They actually take a lot of their influence from Led Zeppelin though. I would argue that, despite the fact that Heart is a great band, they’re strictly worsethan Led Zeppelin. Zep has better vocals, guitar, bass, drums, and better songs as a whole. One might argue that Heart is more valuable to the rock world due to the fact that the lead singer and lead guitarist are females, and Led Zeppelin are all males, but I don’t think that has bearing on the product given out. Just as Heart should be evaluated on works, and not on circumstances, Rollins should be evaluated on stats, and not on positional relevance.
While I don't mean to diminish Rollins amazing season, I don't think he was better than Holliday. If Joe Mauer can't win the MVP for being the batting champion at a catcher position, then one would think that position bears little relevance in the MVP voting. Thus, I can't take the fact that Rollins is a middle infielder into much consideration when trying to establish solid voting guidelines. There is a flaw to be pointed out here with asking regional writers to vote for the award with no conceivable guidelines (How the hell did Carlos Marmol even get one third place vote?) Baseball Writers need to establish formal guidelines, or even better a formal debate Senate style, so that we the fans can understand what they're basing these awards on.
Friday, November 23, 2007
Rest in Peace Joe Kennedy
It was announced today by Fox Sports that former Oakland A, Toronto Blue Jay, Colorado Rockie, Arizona Diamondback, and Tampa Bay Devil Ray Joe Kennedy suddenly passed while visiting his wife's family in Tampa. Apparently Joe got up in the middle of the night and collapsed, dying presumably of a brain aneurysm or a heart attack.
Kennedy has been in the league for a few years, having been a trade chip for teams for a number of years. The A's acquired him a few years ago along with Jay Witasick for everyone's favorite Eric Byrnes. Kennedy pitched well as a middle reliever, but struggled when the A's tried to make them their 5th starter, desperate for a lefty arm. Kennedy played a key role for the A's because of this depravity of left handed arms, and despite stats that may suggest otherwise, was quite valuable to the team. Last year, after adding a true left handed specialist in Alan Embree, Kennedy was left to prove himself as long relief/starter, and unfortunately didn't do quite well. He was designated for assignment, claimed off waivers by Arizona, then the same was done until he got to Toronto.
Joe Kennedy was a guy who was taken in by a lot of teams looking for a lefty arm out of the pen, and never really quite fit in to any particular team's scheme. He pitched well enough in Colorado as a starter, but when the A's asked for the same, he just couldn't click. When he came out of the pen for the A's though, he pitched fine again (2.31 ERA in 2006.) As teams couldn't seem to get him to click in their particular scheme, they dumped him. It's a sad fact of the game, but it's one that Kennedy took with grace. Everywhere he went, he did as he was asked, and didn't fuss up about being switched from this role to that. There's something commendable about that.
In a sports world where Alex Rodriguez is commended as heroic for taking 286 million from the Yankees, Kennedy is a guy who just wanted to play ball. He put the team's needs over his own desires, and he took what job he was assigned in order to have money for his family. I don't mean to present Joe Kennedy as a Tiny Tim with the Ebenezer Scrooge MLB against him, but guys like Joe Kennedy easily slip through the cracks of a very star oriented sports lifestyle.
He is survived by his wife and 1 year old son, for whom he willingly bounced around multiple cities, states, and countries. Next time you're looking for autographs at a ball game, take a minute to look at the program at the random bullpen guys whose names you don't know. Without guys like Joe Kennedy pitching to the left handed power hitter, or filling in for the franchise face starter, baseball wouldn't be the glorious team sport it is.
Kennedy has been in the league for a few years, having been a trade chip for teams for a number of years. The A's acquired him a few years ago along with Jay Witasick for everyone's favorite Eric Byrnes. Kennedy pitched well as a middle reliever, but struggled when the A's tried to make them their 5th starter, desperate for a lefty arm. Kennedy played a key role for the A's because of this depravity of left handed arms, and despite stats that may suggest otherwise, was quite valuable to the team. Last year, after adding a true left handed specialist in Alan Embree, Kennedy was left to prove himself as long relief/starter, and unfortunately didn't do quite well. He was designated for assignment, claimed off waivers by Arizona, then the same was done until he got to Toronto.
Joe Kennedy was a guy who was taken in by a lot of teams looking for a lefty arm out of the pen, and never really quite fit in to any particular team's scheme. He pitched well enough in Colorado as a starter, but when the A's asked for the same, he just couldn't click. When he came out of the pen for the A's though, he pitched fine again (2.31 ERA in 2006.) As teams couldn't seem to get him to click in their particular scheme, they dumped him. It's a sad fact of the game, but it's one that Kennedy took with grace. Everywhere he went, he did as he was asked, and didn't fuss up about being switched from this role to that. There's something commendable about that.
In a sports world where Alex Rodriguez is commended as heroic for taking 286 million from the Yankees, Kennedy is a guy who just wanted to play ball. He put the team's needs over his own desires, and he took what job he was assigned in order to have money for his family. I don't mean to present Joe Kennedy as a Tiny Tim with the Ebenezer Scrooge MLB against him, but guys like Joe Kennedy easily slip through the cracks of a very star oriented sports lifestyle.
He is survived by his wife and 1 year old son, for whom he willingly bounced around multiple cities, states, and countries. Next time you're looking for autographs at a ball game, take a minute to look at the program at the random bullpen guys whose names you don't know. Without guys like Joe Kennedy pitching to the left handed power hitter, or filling in for the franchise face starter, baseball wouldn't be the glorious team sport it is.
Thursday, November 22, 2007
The Maddest Proposal
The Angels announced today that they have signed perennial Gold Glover and known saint Torii Hunter to their lineup, prompting inquisitive looks all around. While most of baseball won't argue that Hunter was one of the best free agents on the market, the move makes about as much sense as bringing Tofu for any vegetarians at your Raiders Tailgate party. The fact of the matter is that Hunter joins an already gluttoned outfield staff and will be expected to be the piece that completes the Angels World Series staff and bring back 2002.
Earlier this week, the Angels made the even more flabbergasting trade for Jon Garland, giving up an Orlando Cabrera coming off a career year (.301 BA, .345 OBP, .397 Slugging and only missing 7 games.) The Angels also have no suitable backup in the organization (short of the Cuisinart-versatile Chone Figgins, leaving the mediocre Maicer Izturis at third.) Many Angels fans thought this would lead to the announcement of the signing of a big bat (perhaps Miguel Cabrera, still the most fitting signing they could make,) but instead a rushed signing of Hunter is the deal that LA delivers. Angels General Manager Tony Reagins is committed this offseason to making any move that will bring the Angels closer to a championship, but the Hunter move leaves a lot of heads bleeding from the hand marks left.
So the story goes like this: Angels want another bat, so they look at free agents who had a great year last year. They see a guy who's just over 30 who might fill the role. They find one, zoom their sights in, and quickly sign him to a 5 year deal. Sound familiar? It is. They did the exact same thing last offseason with Gary Matthews Jr. After Matthews had a disappointing season last year, it made room for Reggie Willits to show his skills, and for the first couple months he made a Rookie of the Year case. Rather than letting the 4 man crew of Matthews, Willits, Garret Anderson, and Vladimir Guerrerro (remember him?) hold their own around the fence, the Angels signed Hunter for 5 years and 90 million, leaving Matthews and Willits riding in the middle seat of the proverbial Angels pickup truck. Meanwhile, (in addition to the aforementioned Shortstop FUBAR earlier in the week) the Angels could still use a catcher to move Napoli to a reserve role, where he should probably be anyway.
Why did the Angels make this move? How could the angels sign Hunter in a situation where he doesn't seem needed? First of all, Hunter does fit the angels batting scheme (able to play the base stealing/sac fly small ball game, and a #3 hitter to solidify Vlad) and he will bring a vocal leader to a clubhouse who has lacked a media-friendly star for a while. John Lackey and Vladimir Guerrero, while stars, lack any sort of media loving (Guerrero is very shy, and Lackey has about as many people skills as John Rocker's armpit.) The Angels may have had this money available due to the departure of Bartolo Colon (4 year, 51 million) and the owners being committed to a championship, but it also shows a distrust in its current players. Perhaps this is a precursor to making Vladimir Guerrero their full-time DH (where he spent most of last year,) but if not it moves Matthews to a 50 million dollar platoon role. If this is a precursor to a trade, the logical conclusion is that it has to be Matthews (and maybe someone else after his 2007 season) for a shortstop. Perhaps Carlos Guillen will want to keep playing Shortstop after being told by the Tigers he will move to First Base, and he would even fit the Angels scheme of "sign a 32 year old guy who hit around .300 last year so he must be good."
The bottom line is that the Angels are making a move that will hopefully add a bat to secure themselves as a dominant team, but this really isn't the bat they're looking for. Despite the fact that an otherwise shallow Free Agent market is rich in centerfielders (Hunter, Andruw Jones, Aaron Rowand, etc.) that doesn't justify adding another outfielder. A catcher or an infielder would have made much more sense, but this is another sign that the Angels are hoping that money will sign their problems. They don't seem to have learned from their last signing of an aging ~.265 BA hitter that one good year doesn't mean all that much. As much as I love Torii Hunter as a humanitarian and a guy, he just doesn't fit with the Angels.
Earlier this week, the Angels made the even more flabbergasting trade for Jon Garland, giving up an Orlando Cabrera coming off a career year (.301 BA, .345 OBP, .397 Slugging and only missing 7 games.) The Angels also have no suitable backup in the organization (short of the Cuisinart-versatile Chone Figgins, leaving the mediocre Maicer Izturis at third.) Many Angels fans thought this would lead to the announcement of the signing of a big bat (perhaps Miguel Cabrera, still the most fitting signing they could make,) but instead a rushed signing of Hunter is the deal that LA delivers. Angels General Manager Tony Reagins is committed this offseason to making any move that will bring the Angels closer to a championship, but the Hunter move leaves a lot of heads bleeding from the hand marks left.
So the story goes like this: Angels want another bat, so they look at free agents who had a great year last year. They see a guy who's just over 30 who might fill the role. They find one, zoom their sights in, and quickly sign him to a 5 year deal. Sound familiar? It is. They did the exact same thing last offseason with Gary Matthews Jr. After Matthews had a disappointing season last year, it made room for Reggie Willits to show his skills, and for the first couple months he made a Rookie of the Year case. Rather than letting the 4 man crew of Matthews, Willits, Garret Anderson, and Vladimir Guerrerro (remember him?) hold their own around the fence, the Angels signed Hunter for 5 years and 90 million, leaving Matthews and Willits riding in the middle seat of the proverbial Angels pickup truck. Meanwhile, (in addition to the aforementioned Shortstop FUBAR earlier in the week) the Angels could still use a catcher to move Napoli to a reserve role, where he should probably be anyway.
Why did the Angels make this move? How could the angels sign Hunter in a situation where he doesn't seem needed? First of all, Hunter does fit the angels batting scheme (able to play the base stealing/sac fly small ball game, and a #3 hitter to solidify Vlad) and he will bring a vocal leader to a clubhouse who has lacked a media-friendly star for a while. John Lackey and Vladimir Guerrero, while stars, lack any sort of media loving (Guerrero is very shy, and Lackey has about as many people skills as John Rocker's armpit.) The Angels may have had this money available due to the departure of Bartolo Colon (4 year, 51 million) and the owners being committed to a championship, but it also shows a distrust in its current players. Perhaps this is a precursor to making Vladimir Guerrero their full-time DH (where he spent most of last year,) but if not it moves Matthews to a 50 million dollar platoon role. If this is a precursor to a trade, the logical conclusion is that it has to be Matthews (and maybe someone else after his 2007 season) for a shortstop. Perhaps Carlos Guillen will want to keep playing Shortstop after being told by the Tigers he will move to First Base, and he would even fit the Angels scheme of "sign a 32 year old guy who hit around .300 last year so he must be good."
The bottom line is that the Angels are making a move that will hopefully add a bat to secure themselves as a dominant team, but this really isn't the bat they're looking for. Despite the fact that an otherwise shallow Free Agent market is rich in centerfielders (Hunter, Andruw Jones, Aaron Rowand, etc.) that doesn't justify adding another outfielder. A catcher or an infielder would have made much more sense, but this is another sign that the Angels are hoping that money will sign their problems. They don't seem to have learned from their last signing of an aging ~.265 BA hitter that one good year doesn't mean all that much. As much as I love Torii Hunter as a humanitarian and a guy, he just doesn't fit with the Angels.
Inaugural post!
Hello everyone out there, and welcome to my Blog! I'll be using this as a medium to practice my sports writing and to convey thoughts about the sports world. I'm aiming to update 2-3 times a week, and will try to respond to comments made on the Blog or by email as promptly and succinctly as possible. Please let me know how everything looks, and any suggestions you have!
Andy Patrick.
Andy Patrick.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)