After finishing my last piece on how best to maximize the A's chances of winning, I thought about the Giants. What exactly needs to happen in order for them to have a chance? This thought process was much more involved. I concluded that the reason I'm so down on the Giants is because much more needs to happen for them to succeed:
1. The Giants need a solid 3rd Baseman, 2nd Baseman, and someone in the infield needs to hit for power. The Giants missed out on Pedro Feliz--probably because he got identical offers from San Francisco and Philadelphia, but with the Phillies he gets to share an infield with three MVP candidates. Rumors abound now of a trade for Joe Crede, and I've long supported a trade for Brandon Inge, but statistically they're mostly Feliz clones. Either Rich Aurilia or Kevin Frandsen needs to prove themselves worthy of playing every day, and the same goes for Ray Durham. Furthermore the Giants need a power hitter to go with Rowand and Molina. The best hope for this now is probably Nate Schierholtz, but he doesn't have a position available for him.
UPDATE: I just read that Omar Vizquel will be out to 4-6 weeks, with week 1 of the regular season being the earliest he might come back. This already sets us back, as Frandsen won't be able to get as much 3rd Base practice in during Spring Training, and Vizquel really needs to be a rock to let the rest of the infield develop.
2. The Starting staff needs to be ready to carry the team. The Giants have three potential aces in Matt Cain, Barry Zito, and Tim Lincecum, and these three guys all have to be ready to win at least 15 games, or at least put forth the quality starts to do so. As evidenced by Cain's disastrous Win-Loss record despite being in 10th in ERA in the National League, the Giants won't always produce offensively. In order to give the Giants a winning season, the Giants starters have to give the offense more than enough starts to succeed to compensate for their poor run production.
3. The bullpen needs to be ready for low scoring games, and hold them. The Giants last year were 39-55 in games decided by two runs or less. While this isn't entirely the bullpen's fault, since the offense is basically the same (-Bonds + Rowand) the bullpen has to be ready. The Giants have a nice duo in Brian Wilson/Brad Hennessey, and Bochy needs to utilize them. Bruce Bochy needs to be prepared to bring one of them on in the 7th inning, when the game may get out of conrtol. Hopefully they can push themselves past the allure of the save stat and commit to winning games--which involves utilizing the best reliever whenever its necessary.
Phew, I'm exhausted already. Now we get to the fun part; what needs to happen outside of San Francisco.
1. Takashi Saito needs to remember he's 38, the Dodgers' rookies need to stall another year, and Andruw Jones needs to play as sub-par as last year. At the moment, the Dodgers are poised to have a big year. Saito will probably be great for one more year (and his heir apparent Jonathan Broxton waiting in the wings to support him,) they have a boat load of young impact players (Chad Billingsley, Matt Kemp, James Loney, etc.) and established stars in Brad Penny, Russell Martin, and Jones. These guys are all strictly better than their Giants' counterparts, and need to stall/breakdown to allow for the Giants to succeed.
2. The Diamondbacks need to collectively Sophomore slump. Outside of Brandon Webb, pretty much every Diamondback is coming off their first huge year. Eric Byrnes stopped streaking, Dan Haren made his first All Star Game, and their young rookies broke out. There is a chance that players experience a phenomenon known as Sophomore Slump. This happens by analyzing tape and realizing players weaknesses. For instance, after Bobby Crosby's Rookie of the Year season, pitchers realized that he chases the low outside slider way too often, so he was subsequently fed an Atkins-Diet worth, and he began declining. Barry Zito tends to rely on his breaking ball to get hitters to chase pitches outside of the strike zone, so batters simply stopped swinging and started taking the walk. He has yet to return to Cy Young form. The Giants need to pray that enough of the Diamondbacks have these weaknesses that they decline.
3. The Rockies need to go back to last year, minus the huge surge at the end. The Rockies Starting staff is quite poor outside of Jeff Francis, and this is exploitable by the extremely hitter-friendly Coors Field. The Rockies will put up inflated offensive numbers due to Coors field and having a very good core in Holliday/Hawpe/Helton/Tulowitzki. The Giants need to hope the Rockies become the Rangers of the NL West -- all offense, no pitching.
4. Oh yeah, the Padres need to stink too. They don't look too threatening outside of the possible Best Pitcher in the League. Hopefully he doesn't serve as the Orel Hershiser for them, and they remain mediocre.
There you have it. If ever I sound depressed about the Giants' hopes for the season, its because thy seem to need a lot more in order to succeed. They need two more teams to tank then the A's, while relying on a lineup with more holes. Nonetheless, it is possible. I think of it like playing Bingo, except the Giants board is 7x7 instead of 5x5. The Giants can get a bingo, but it will require a lot of luck.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Keys to Winning
As Spring Training begins and projections start popping up, most A's fans are placing their bets on a losing season. That said, there is hope. These are all major league caliber players, and its conceivable they could take down a much better Angels team, just as anyone could. From what I see, here are the most important elements to this success, in order of importance:
1. Rich Harden has to be healthy. I can not underscore this point enough. A healthy Rich Harden for even three quarters of the season would give the A's a significant enough boost to make them a winning team. With Harden healthy, the rotation becomes Harden/Blanton/Gaudin/Duchscherer/DiNardo. The more games the A's have to dip into Dan Meyer and Dana Eveland to start will be more games lost. I'm almost to the point of saying Harden is necessary to a winning record, but there are other factors, such as...
2. A healthy Eric Chavez and Bobby Crosby. If Chavez returns to 30 slam form and Crosby can at least be the not-awful player we know he could be, it gives the Swisher-less lineup a big boost. Travis Buck-Daric Barton is a fairly good 1-2 punch, but having a healthy Eric Chavez and Crosby batting 3rd/5th around Cust will put a good amount more runs on the board. Ellis can drop down to the 6th position where he really excels.
3. Somebody needs to step up and play Center Field and provide a capable bat. Right now all eyes are looking at Chris Denorfia, who Baseball Prospectus predicts will pull a 266/331/414 line, which would be good if he can stay off the injuries which plagued him last season. Carlos Gonzalez, acquired in the Haren Trade, has a Herculean throwing arm, and could take over the position after the All-Star Break if all goes well and he improves his plate discipline. Buck is solid in Right Field, and I like the platoon of the left handed Ryan Sweeney and the right handed Emil Brown in Left Field. Regardless, that gaping hole in Center Field needs to be filled.
That's what needs to be done in Oakland. On the other hand, things could happen outside of The Town:
1. First and foremost, the Rangers and Mariners need to suck. The Mariners' offense needs to prove as sickly as the A's hope it will be, and the Rangers need to continue throwing Happy Fun Balls to the opposition. If the A's have another solid team to compete against as well as the Angels, they'll split wins too often to take the title. With the strength of the Yankees, Red Sox, Tigers, and Indians, I don't think there's a realistic chance the West will take the Wild Card.
2. Vladimir Guerrero needs to break down. He was hit by the injury bug last year, and this year he insists on playing Right Field nonetheless. This could lead to more injury, and a big bat loss to the Angels. Without Vlad the Angels have no suitable cleanup hitter, and could have trouble bringing home all their speedsters.
3. The Angels pitching staff needs to deteriorate. Outside of John Lackey, none of the starts have overpowering stuff. Kelvim Escobar will be off to a slow start due to missing the first month, and Francisco Rodriguez always flabbergasts analysts as to how he stays healthy under all his strain. It's conceivable that starters 2-5 could all have 4.5+ ERA, and that would be very good for the A's.
It is possible that the A's could win the AL West title, although it's gonna be tough. Sure, this sort of hoping can be done with any team, but this at least gives us something to look for as the season begins. I'll be keeping a checklist, and we'll see how it affects the standings at the end.
1. Rich Harden has to be healthy. I can not underscore this point enough. A healthy Rich Harden for even three quarters of the season would give the A's a significant enough boost to make them a winning team. With Harden healthy, the rotation becomes Harden/Blanton/Gaudin/Duchscherer/DiNardo. The more games the A's have to dip into Dan Meyer and Dana Eveland to start will be more games lost. I'm almost to the point of saying Harden is necessary to a winning record, but there are other factors, such as...
2. A healthy Eric Chavez and Bobby Crosby. If Chavez returns to 30 slam form and Crosby can at least be the not-awful player we know he could be, it gives the Swisher-less lineup a big boost. Travis Buck-Daric Barton is a fairly good 1-2 punch, but having a healthy Eric Chavez and Crosby batting 3rd/5th around Cust will put a good amount more runs on the board. Ellis can drop down to the 6th position where he really excels.
3. Somebody needs to step up and play Center Field and provide a capable bat. Right now all eyes are looking at Chris Denorfia, who Baseball Prospectus predicts will pull a 266/331/414 line, which would be good if he can stay off the injuries which plagued him last season. Carlos Gonzalez, acquired in the Haren Trade, has a Herculean throwing arm, and could take over the position after the All-Star Break if all goes well and he improves his plate discipline. Buck is solid in Right Field, and I like the platoon of the left handed Ryan Sweeney and the right handed Emil Brown in Left Field. Regardless, that gaping hole in Center Field needs to be filled.
That's what needs to be done in Oakland. On the other hand, things could happen outside of The Town:
1. First and foremost, the Rangers and Mariners need to suck. The Mariners' offense needs to prove as sickly as the A's hope it will be, and the Rangers need to continue throwing Happy Fun Balls to the opposition. If the A's have another solid team to compete against as well as the Angels, they'll split wins too often to take the title. With the strength of the Yankees, Red Sox, Tigers, and Indians, I don't think there's a realistic chance the West will take the Wild Card.
2. Vladimir Guerrero needs to break down. He was hit by the injury bug last year, and this year he insists on playing Right Field nonetheless. This could lead to more injury, and a big bat loss to the Angels. Without Vlad the Angels have no suitable cleanup hitter, and could have trouble bringing home all their speedsters.
3. The Angels pitching staff needs to deteriorate. Outside of John Lackey, none of the starts have overpowering stuff. Kelvim Escobar will be off to a slow start due to missing the first month, and Francisco Rodriguez always flabbergasts analysts as to how he stays healthy under all his strain. It's conceivable that starters 2-5 could all have 4.5+ ERA, and that would be very good for the A's.
It is possible that the A's could win the AL West title, although it's gonna be tough. Sure, this sort of hoping can be done with any team, but this at least gives us something to look for as the season begins. I'll be keeping a checklist, and we'll see how it affects the standings at the end.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Sports Geek III
As with the last entry, read below to get the most out of this article. This is section 3.
The Sports media as a whole claims to be more involved with the game, and as such, more qualified to make certain judgments about the game that the Sports Geek supposedly can not. Most awards are in the hands of the sports media because they can supposedly be counted on to make a more objective analysis when it comes to these things. Whether this actually happens or not is another story, but most assuredly they can be counted on better than the fan to make these decisions. The average fan just doesn't have the time amidst their 8 hour a day job, family, and other commitments to objectively analyze every player in the league, and there's nothing wrong with that. The sports media has this job to some degree, since they live off their ability to rate and wax poetically about such men.
The danger here is when this responsibility forms a fraternity. A lot of the voters over the years base their judgments on past experience (i.e. Gold Glovers who actually decline over the years but seem better than others) or something even more ludicrous. Woody Paige has lately become the figurehead for insane balloting, and it raises a question. If fans can't be counted on to make objective accusations, why are we relying on such men for their objectivity, when they clearly are influenced by the same hometown influence as other men?
Where am I going with this, you ask? Do I think that Sports Geeks should handle the voting process solely because they are super students? Hell no. While Sports Geeks do tend to have more objectivity due to their reliance on statistical analysis, I don't think that they should replace the sports media in this voting process. I do think that the sports media needs to take into account this new class though when evaluating their position. Sports fans have access to much more information than earlier--if a writer says that Hal from Baltimore is the best hitter in the American League, the average schmuck in Montana can go on the internet and look at the stats and put the writer to his word. Remember Horace and Edwin, the two goofballs I mentioned in section I? Sports Geeks look at Horace and see a star in the final year of his contract who can be dumped for a collection of talent before he inevitably leaves to another team which can afford him, and Edwin as a 45 year old man with bum knees who will never steal 100 bases like he used to (I'm looking at you Rickey Henderson.)
This leaves us at an interesting turning point. Sports media, as the deeply involved faithful, have to be ready to account for themselves because of the existence of the Sports Geek. I believe that we'll be soon shifting into an era where the media present sports more tangibly. Even though we can't pick up the ball and throw a spiral 60 yards for a touchdown, we can make our own informed decisions as to who is or isn't the best. With the oncoming of the Sports Geek, the media must reevaluate their own position; be ready to account for your writing to both fans and players, or be swept away by a sea of criticism.
I believe I'll put this to rest for now. On Monday I'll go back to covering sports, and maybe come back to this at some point later in the year. In the meantime, comment on what you think of this whole thought process!
The Sports media as a whole claims to be more involved with the game, and as such, more qualified to make certain judgments about the game that the Sports Geek supposedly can not. Most awards are in the hands of the sports media because they can supposedly be counted on to make a more objective analysis when it comes to these things. Whether this actually happens or not is another story, but most assuredly they can be counted on better than the fan to make these decisions. The average fan just doesn't have the time amidst their 8 hour a day job, family, and other commitments to objectively analyze every player in the league, and there's nothing wrong with that. The sports media has this job to some degree, since they live off their ability to rate and wax poetically about such men.
The danger here is when this responsibility forms a fraternity. A lot of the voters over the years base their judgments on past experience (i.e. Gold Glovers who actually decline over the years but seem better than others) or something even more ludicrous. Woody Paige has lately become the figurehead for insane balloting, and it raises a question. If fans can't be counted on to make objective accusations, why are we relying on such men for their objectivity, when they clearly are influenced by the same hometown influence as other men?
Where am I going with this, you ask? Do I think that Sports Geeks should handle the voting process solely because they are super students? Hell no. While Sports Geeks do tend to have more objectivity due to their reliance on statistical analysis, I don't think that they should replace the sports media in this voting process. I do think that the sports media needs to take into account this new class though when evaluating their position. Sports fans have access to much more information than earlier--if a writer says that Hal from Baltimore is the best hitter in the American League, the average schmuck in Montana can go on the internet and look at the stats and put the writer to his word. Remember Horace and Edwin, the two goofballs I mentioned in section I? Sports Geeks look at Horace and see a star in the final year of his contract who can be dumped for a collection of talent before he inevitably leaves to another team which can afford him, and Edwin as a 45 year old man with bum knees who will never steal 100 bases like he used to (I'm looking at you Rickey Henderson.)
This leaves us at an interesting turning point. Sports media, as the deeply involved faithful, have to be ready to account for themselves because of the existence of the Sports Geek. I believe that we'll be soon shifting into an era where the media present sports more tangibly. Even though we can't pick up the ball and throw a spiral 60 yards for a touchdown, we can make our own informed decisions as to who is or isn't the best. With the oncoming of the Sports Geek, the media must reevaluate their own position; be ready to account for your writing to both fans and players, or be swept away by a sea of criticism.
I believe I'll put this to rest for now. On Monday I'll go back to covering sports, and maybe come back to this at some point later in the year. In the meantime, comment on what you think of this whole thought process!
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Sports Geek II
If you haven't read the first section, please do so by scrolling a little down. It's a multi-part essay, so you'll benefit more by reading the first section.
(continued from below)
The Sports Geek understands players strengths, weaknesses, comings, goings, and other such qualities, and chooses to take part in sports by analyzing these things. Most Sports Geeks have hometown teams they support. They follow and love their local teams with much the same fervor as their other sports-loving friends, yet the Sports Geek is typically more critical than his counterparts. Let me share a story with you:
Back in 2005, I was at an A's-Red Sox game with my fellow Sports Geek Adam, a Red Sox fan. Both teams had in their bullpen what's known as a "Lefty One Out Guy" (or LOOGY.) LOOGYs are random left handed pitchers in the bullpen who come in to face the big left handed slugger on the other team (Like Barry Bonds or David Ortiz) and little else. For the Red Sox it was Alan Embree, and for the A's it was Ricardo Rincon. It's fun to hate on the LOOGYs because they typically come in to high pressure situations and occasionally blow up just like any other pitcher. The difference is that when the LOOGYs blow up, its usually pretty bad. Anyways, so when Embree came in, Adam jokingly handed me the game, since he figured Embree would give it up. When Rincon came in later, I jokingly did the same. Immediately I was hounded by a certain lady in the season ticket holder's section as not being a true fan. Supposedly a true fan would support their team, and not rag on Rincon as I did.
Was she right? She believed that being a fan entailed support of their team, and not picking and choosing when to support and not to support. To her, that is fandom. For the Sports Geek though, fandom is about evaluating what is and isn't successful for a team, and having fun supporting the good practices. Sports Geeks typically go deeper into the game, to try to find out exactly what seems to work, and if a team replicates those practices, the Sports Geek is happy. This most commonly takes the form of Stat Analysis such as Sabermetrics but it can also take forms such as not signing overrated players, key managerial decisions like pinch hits and sacrifice bunts, or the trading or hiring of better players. If the team doesn't reproduce these things, often times the Sports Geek criticizes the team in somewhat of an older brother fashion. As in "Oh, you silly Giants. You'll never win your division with old farts such as Ray Durham and Omar Vizquel, you need to do better!"
The heart of this particular issue is that the Sports Geek realizes that they're not involved in the game, but are capable of analyzing what makes a good team and what doesn't. There are trends to winning teams, and once those trends are realized, the Sports Geek sits on the sidelines to wait and see if their team can reproduce those traits better than other teams. Sports Geeks still root for a team, but in a slightly different way. Sports Geeks are ready to criticize and argue, and are ready to prove themselves.
That's all for today. On Friday there will be more.
(continued from below)
The Sports Geek understands players strengths, weaknesses, comings, goings, and other such qualities, and chooses to take part in sports by analyzing these things. Most Sports Geeks have hometown teams they support. They follow and love their local teams with much the same fervor as their other sports-loving friends, yet the Sports Geek is typically more critical than his counterparts. Let me share a story with you:
Back in 2005, I was at an A's-Red Sox game with my fellow Sports Geek Adam, a Red Sox fan. Both teams had in their bullpen what's known as a "Lefty One Out Guy" (or LOOGY.) LOOGYs are random left handed pitchers in the bullpen who come in to face the big left handed slugger on the other team (Like Barry Bonds or David Ortiz) and little else. For the Red Sox it was Alan Embree, and for the A's it was Ricardo Rincon. It's fun to hate on the LOOGYs because they typically come in to high pressure situations and occasionally blow up just like any other pitcher. The difference is that when the LOOGYs blow up, its usually pretty bad. Anyways, so when Embree came in, Adam jokingly handed me the game, since he figured Embree would give it up. When Rincon came in later, I jokingly did the same. Immediately I was hounded by a certain lady in the season ticket holder's section as not being a true fan. Supposedly a true fan would support their team, and not rag on Rincon as I did.
Was she right? She believed that being a fan entailed support of their team, and not picking and choosing when to support and not to support. To her, that is fandom. For the Sports Geek though, fandom is about evaluating what is and isn't successful for a team, and having fun supporting the good practices. Sports Geeks typically go deeper into the game, to try to find out exactly what seems to work, and if a team replicates those practices, the Sports Geek is happy. This most commonly takes the form of Stat Analysis such as Sabermetrics but it can also take forms such as not signing overrated players, key managerial decisions like pinch hits and sacrifice bunts, or the trading or hiring of better players. If the team doesn't reproduce these things, often times the Sports Geek criticizes the team in somewhat of an older brother fashion. As in "Oh, you silly Giants. You'll never win your division with old farts such as Ray Durham and Omar Vizquel, you need to do better!"
The heart of this particular issue is that the Sports Geek realizes that they're not involved in the game, but are capable of analyzing what makes a good team and what doesn't. There are trends to winning teams, and once those trends are realized, the Sports Geek sits on the sidelines to wait and see if their team can reproduce those traits better than other teams. Sports Geeks still root for a team, but in a slightly different way. Sports Geeks are ready to criticize and argue, and are ready to prove themselves.
That's all for today. On Friday there will be more.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Sports Geek I
First of all, I apologize for the delay with entries. I've been dealing with a lot of work outside of the blog, and didn't particularly enjoy the idea of publishing bad work. So there it is. In the meantime, I've been working on an idea that I'll roll out in a series of articles entitled "Sports Geek." Today is #1.
In Will Leitch's book God Save the Fan, Leitch argues that fans have remained constant over the years. Fans care about their team, and any other drama that surfaces is unnecessary. I would argue that over the last twenty years a new class of fan has evolved; the middle of the road fan, or Sports Geek. Just as the Industrial Revolution brought upon the European Middle Class, the technological boom has brought upon the Sports Geek. Armed with fantasy sports, the blog, and the ability to watch whatever sporting event they wish via the internet and digital TV, the Sports Geek enjoys sports on a slight more involved level that most fans, but less so than the media and industry. This new fandom isn't any better or worse than others, but at present is blooming into an unfamiliar world--and the sports industry must learn to embrace it.
Before the technological boom, fans were restricted to enjoying only the games that were presented with; limiting them to being hometown fans by necessity. Before Curt Flood challenged the contract system, players mostly played games within one organization. This was good in many ways for fans--if they liked Lou Gehrig, they could follow the Yankees for years and get Gehrig updates every day. Now though, with the exception of the occasional Craig Biggio, players rarely play their entire careers within one organization. Teams such as the A's and Twins frequently are forced to let their best players go due to financial concerns. This has created frustration for many fans. It's pretty common for teams to come into a season with as many as six new starters, having either acquired better or younger players from other teams, or having lost their formerly best to free agency. Fans can deal with this constant shuffle in College sports because there's often a personal tie to college, and there's no avoiding the shuffle there. I believe the average fan feels betrayed by this new process. Reading mailbags sent in to beat writers, the most common letters are either "Why did we trade Horace, he was the heart and soul!" or "Bring back Edwin, he fills every need we have!" We'll come back to these two knuckleheads later, but for now my point is that fans become attached to these players, and feel like the team is somehow hurting its fans by getting rid of them. While its true that most baseball owners could greatly increase their chances of winning by opening up the check book more, the harsh reality is that teams will/can only spend so much, and free agency will cause players to move. The average fan accepts it but feels betrayed--the Sports Geek goes deeper.
That's all for now. Mull over this, and I'll continue at some point on Wednesday.
In Will Leitch's book God Save the Fan, Leitch argues that fans have remained constant over the years. Fans care about their team, and any other drama that surfaces is unnecessary. I would argue that over the last twenty years a new class of fan has evolved; the middle of the road fan, or Sports Geek. Just as the Industrial Revolution brought upon the European Middle Class, the technological boom has brought upon the Sports Geek. Armed with fantasy sports, the blog, and the ability to watch whatever sporting event they wish via the internet and digital TV, the Sports Geek enjoys sports on a slight more involved level that most fans, but less so than the media and industry. This new fandom isn't any better or worse than others, but at present is blooming into an unfamiliar world--and the sports industry must learn to embrace it.
Before the technological boom, fans were restricted to enjoying only the games that were presented with; limiting them to being hometown fans by necessity. Before Curt Flood challenged the contract system, players mostly played games within one organization. This was good in many ways for fans--if they liked Lou Gehrig, they could follow the Yankees for years and get Gehrig updates every day. Now though, with the exception of the occasional Craig Biggio, players rarely play their entire careers within one organization. Teams such as the A's and Twins frequently are forced to let their best players go due to financial concerns. This has created frustration for many fans. It's pretty common for teams to come into a season with as many as six new starters, having either acquired better or younger players from other teams, or having lost their formerly best to free agency. Fans can deal with this constant shuffle in College sports because there's often a personal tie to college, and there's no avoiding the shuffle there. I believe the average fan feels betrayed by this new process. Reading mailbags sent in to beat writers, the most common letters are either "Why did we trade Horace, he was the heart and soul!" or "Bring back Edwin, he fills every need we have!" We'll come back to these two knuckleheads later, but for now my point is that fans become attached to these players, and feel like the team is somehow hurting its fans by getting rid of them. While its true that most baseball owners could greatly increase their chances of winning by opening up the check book more, the harsh reality is that teams will/can only spend so much, and free agency will cause players to move. The average fan accepts it but feels betrayed--the Sports Geek goes deeper.
That's all for now. Mull over this, and I'll continue at some point on Wednesday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)