MLB '09
 

Yeah, it's January. But following off season moves is half the fun!

I'm sad to see Jeff Kent retiring. Finest mustache in baseball.

I'm happy with to Dodgers' off season restraint. A couple low-key but pivotal pickups, some smart passes (Randy Johnson and Trevor Hoffman? Ugh, no). Still have the best pool of young talent around in tact. And still seem to be in excellent position to wait out Ramirez.

And good by Andruw Jones.

If this Randy Wolf deal goes through, they can probably get by on pitching until a mid-season opportunity presents itself. It'd be great to grab Sheets, or Pettite, but not at the expense of a shot at Ramirez.

The Giants picked up Randy Johnson for what's expected to be his final year. He thinks he's got one more good year in him and who is anyone else to say he doesn't? So SF will have three Cy Young award winners in their rotation (also Lincecum and Zito).

That combined with the general weakness in the NL West means SF might have a decent chance at the division. Of course they'd be quickly eliminated in the first round, but a winning record and a division title is miles better than they've done recently.

I'm predicting the Giants will be lucky to get 100 innings out of Johnson this season. Nothing particular to back that up, just a gut feeling.

If the Dodgers do indeed sign Ramirez, you're going to have to rethink that "general weakness" statement.

Two out of the three Cy Young winners in the Giants' rotation are - how to be kind here? - a bit removed from their heyday (but I hear that Zito is, as ever, thisclose to regaining his form).

I'm nobody to say that Randy Johnson doesn't have one more good year in him, but I'll say it anyway.

I remember being at Candlestick mid-season in 1986 when the Giants announced that they had just acquired Steve Carlton. The place went nuts.

Carlton went before the end of the year.

Unless the Unit has been working the flax seed balm, I'm not optimistic.

Ching ching.
I wish I was Mrs. Mark Teixeira, I tells ya what...

I bet GC was saying that before Teixeira got his new contract.

In all honesty... yes.

You know, I wish McCourt would just have the balls to say, "We're not going to sign Manny, so forget about it."

They could sign Manny today. Offer him a 3 year deal and he's yours. 3 years is not a long time to commit to a player of that caliber. He ain't that old. And you'd get a good price on him for those three years. He wants 4, he's not getting even nibbles, he'd accept a year less.

Anything else isn't a serious offer. 1 year deal? Really? Even at the high price, that's an offer that was never meant to be accepted. That was a, "See, fans, we're trying! Manny's just not playing ball with us!" PR move because they think the fans can't handle, "We have no real desire to bring him back." I'd rather they did that and seriously went after a free agent they actually want than play this game.

Orlando Hudson. Nice!

Sweet! I hadn't caught that.

Adam Dunn. Nice!

Who knows: you might be able to break 100 this year!






Of course, I mean lose less than 100 games.

That's aiming a bit high. After all the home run record for a single season is just 73 so 100 could be difficult. Still he is a long ball hitter so you never know. Good attitude there Kevy!




Yeah, I know what you meant. I'm just in denial.

Wow. Ned Colleti is a genius.

First he lands Manny mid season for free.

Then he engineers a world economic meltdown, precipitating a collapse of the free agent market, making it possible to (as it now looks inevitable) resign Manny against all odds at a relative bargain.

All hail Colleti.

If Adam Dunn stays healthy, maybe he can take his record back.

Among all this baseball talk, did anyone notice that the PGA is back in action after an 18 month hiatus. Their first event, The WGC-Accenture Match Play Championship started yesterday.

I believe that this event has been remarked upon.

Looks like there is at least a temporary snag: Manny turned down the offer

Never mind, it turns out they have cancled the event so it won't make the weekend coverage. Silly golf people.

Sigh.

I know, I sorta miss golf too.

Dodgers website tells a slightly different version of the story above, they're supposedly going to be meeting again today.

Why is the Dodgers website covering golf?

Visiting the Dodgers website I ran across this:

The Next 50 Plan

It looks like there are some major updates coming for the park.

Yup, I like what I've seen of the plans.

It'll be bizarre to see a parking structure there.

It will be interesting to see if they can make it into a year round destination with this City Walk like project. Being able to bring in the $$$ during the off season would be a real plus for the organization.

And in that same time span, the Nationals plan on winning 100 games.

Well, the Dodgers are definitely approaching this from the assumption (as seems the be the case, despite Boras' claims otherwise) that they're the only ones bidding.

On the surface, both sides are talking about the same deal - 2 years, $45 million , with the Manny able to opt out of the 2nd year.

The disagreement is that Boras/Manny wants the $45 million to be paid in full in those 2 years. The Dodgers offer has a chunk of it being deferred, interest free, across 5 years.

Anybody else watch The Contender finale last night?

Ya know, I coulda been a contender; I coulda been somebody.

That's just Manny being Manny avoiding spring training.

w00t!

Congrats to you and the Dodgers. I look forwards to booing him when they come to DC....

Way to play hardball Colleti.

If I were Ramirez, even if I pretty much ended up with the same thing initially offered it would have been worth it just to skip part of spring training. If I were him I'd have held out a bit longer.

I understand the need to do so as you don't have much to cheer for.

I'm a free market kind of guy, and admittedly know SQUAT about baseball. However, when I see a guy get 22.5 million per season (that's what it is, right? Something close anyway.) I think about what that represents in terms of what he gets for his performance. Please understand I do not know baseball AT ALL and my examples below may not be realistic, and I'm really looking to find out if he's worth that money in the opinion of the baseball fans here.

22.5 million is 138,888/game (162 game season). I'm not counting post season, but perhaps I should. Let's say he has an incredible season with 200 hits, 120 RBI and 40 HRs. I presume he is being paid this much because of offensive prowess rather than being an incredible defensive outfielder.

Now lets say I could get a guy for 7 million/season, just a good a defensive outfielder who will give me 140 hits, 80 RBI, and 25 HRs. The difference is 15.5 million for 60 hits, 40 RBI, and 15 HRs (but really, the HRS don't even matter...it's the RBI I'd figure).

Is he that much of a fan draw that he's worth that in ticket sales? Do the 60 hits, 40 RBI, and 15 HRs translate into a significant amount of wins? That's only about .25 runs extra/game.

I often run similar type numbers when looking at other athletes in other sports. I am equally flabbergasted when someone like the Cardinals Kurt Warner gets 13 million for a season. Even if they play 19 games and get to the SuperBowl again (win or lose), that's 685,000 for each game! Probably 25K per completion! It is amazing to me.

I wonder how long professional sports can keep this up before they go belly up. The NBA is already starting to experience major financial issues.

That was long than I wanted it to be. Just curious what the thoughts are here about the value of athletes. Again, more power to them if they can demand and get that type of salary. I just don't get it myself, and I love sports in general.

This is professional Baseball It's not so much about bats on ball as it is butts in seats.

138,000 per game, with an average seat price of $29.66 means that if Manny brings in an extra 4,000 fans per game (or significantly less fans if you include food and trinket sales) he has more than paid for himself. Plus the Dodgers get a percentage from away games also. If Manny brings in extra people on the road (and you know he will) then that amount also goes up.

I know that back in the day, Fernando Valenzuela regularly brought in an extra 8,000 or more every time he pitched.

That's the kind of thing that I'm wondering. If he is that much of a draw, then that's great. Knowing it is professional ball and it is about profit, I was wondering if it is possible that they get a return on that huge of an investment in one guy.

To me, though, in looking at the financial troubles of the NBA at present, I wonder how long it is before salaries price the average fan out of the ability to go to the game and the teams start to lose money. That salary will push up other salaries and eventually it becomes unsustainable. Or so I'd figure. I wonder when that point hits.

Off subject, but this is the only sports thread going these days...
 

I was looking at the 2005 NFL draft (the Alex Smith draft) yesterday and i was struck by how horribly some teams used their top-ten pick:

(1) Alex Smith - 49ers
(4) Cedrick Benson - Bears
(6) Adam Pacman Jones - Titans
(7) Troy Williamson - Vikings
(10) Mike Williams - Lions (Matt Millen, you truly suck)

Talk about your poo-poo platters. Not one of these guys is worth a fifth-round pick today.


And it's not like there was no talent available. The Cowboys got DeMarcus Ware at 11 and the Chargers picked up Shawne Merriman with the 12th pick.

It was stunning to see Aaron Rodgers fall to the 24th pick. Even a Niner-hater like me was disgusted when they passed on Rodgers to take Smith.

Word on the street in these parts is that T.O. is coming to the Redskins. Bleh.

A few things. Baseball tickets remain dirt cheap compared to every other pro sport, so they've got a ways to go. The Dodgers continue to pull in record attendance #'s, and with Manny that won't stop. Even with this hefty contract, the Dodgers have significantly reduced their payroll this season over last. So if having a name like Manny continues to fill seats in a down economy, he's worth it.

In terms of Manny's more direct financial impact, two other factors haven't been mentioned. Merchandising. We went to the first game that Manny played in for the Dodgers. By the time we arrived at the park, every 4th person had some sort of Manny merchandise. A big $ player, especially one as charismatic as Manny, is a merchandising sales engine. People don't just buy one Manny-cornrows wig and leave it at that. The money just keeps coming in.

The other thing to consider is that Manny was, without argument, the difference between the Dodgers making the playoffs and winning the first round vs. finishing the season out of the playoffs. I don't know what the teams themselves make from that, but I know that the player bonus for making it to the 2nd round and losing was about $120K. With a 40 man roster, that's near $5 million. So I figure the team must receive a decent bonus as well, on top of the added merchandise and other revenue.

All really good points. One of the problems for the NBA is certainly their ticket prices. Last year I took my daughter and 3 of her friends to a Suns game for her B-day. 3 rows from the top of the arena, $65 per ticket. Ouch. I had a former player of mine give me two 3rd row tickets to the Suns-Lakers game last Sunday. Face value was $225 each. Double ouch (except to me they were free).

Condolences.

Well, with about 1/3 the seating capacity at basketball venues vs. most baseball stadiums, you'd expect ticket prices to be higher. The Dodgers' website doesn't have prices listed at the moment since tickets aren't on sale (they've announced they won't raise prices over last season). But from memory, I know the cheapest seats are around $15. Whereas the most expensive (not including luxury suites) are well over $100, I think possibly over $200 or $300. Average price (not including luxury suites) is $29.50 according to one article. Looking at the site for Staples Center, prices range from $10 to $260. Seems about comparable, I didn't realize that. Although I would venture that there's a higher percentage of decent seats at the lower prices at Dodger Stadium than at Staples Center.

ETA: There we go. Average ticket price for a Lakers game is almost $90. So while there are cheaper seats available at Staples vs. Dodger Stadium, there are proportionately fewer of them, and, by nature of the games and the seating, the cheaper seats at Dodgers Stadium probably offer a less degraded viewing experience than the cheaper seats at Staples.

Please. Oh please. Oh please. C'mon Snyder, you know you want to.


Please.

Even God hates the 49ers:

There is a player statistic called Win Share that attempts to estimate how many wins a specific player contributed to the team. There are various flavors to the statistic but by one of them last year Manny Ramirez contributed a total of 11.3 wins to the Red Sox/Dodgers last season.

In about half a season, he contributed 6.3.

If you replace him with an average outfielder you'd expect that average person to have contributed about 2 wins (4 over the season). So, if you assume similar production the Dodgers might be expecting Manny to provide an extra 7 wins or so in a full season (assuming an average replacement was available).

In baseball, even though they play a lot of games, 7 is a HUGE number. Last year, only 2 of the 6 playoff teams would still have made the post-season if you subtracted 7 games from their win column (Angels would still have won division by 14 games and the White Sox might have become a wild card team). Of the 24 teams that did not make the playoffs, 8 would have if everybody else stayed the same and you gave them an extra 7 wins.

Whether that is worth $25 million I can't say but apparently it is to the Dodgers. Keep in mind, though, that while baseball is a for profit business that doesn't mean that the irrational desire to win at the expense of pure profit is completely removed.

It's an field level vs back of house thing. The players coaches and staff generally put winning first while the back of the house, based on my experience with MLB, puts profits first. Of course for the most part winning equals more profits so both sides remain united but when they don't, it's not the folks on the field calling the shots.

That's what's been so great about the McCourt/Colleti era of the Dodgers so far. They seem to be totally in sync on that balance.

Of course, when you've got the best farm system in baseball that's been pumping out a consistent stockpile of top prospects, you get to have that luxury. Who needs to spend money and make risky trades when you've got 3 guys at each position ready to go for, essentially, free?

And the Lord said to the man, why tarriest thou? When thou seest things done in the old ways, when they make gods of men that runneth the ball and smasheth the mouth, and when the down for throwing shall forever be the third and when in that passing time it will rain down blitzes, I say to hee, hie thee hence.

These numbers might be off a few dollars as I didn't look to hard at whether these were for the most recent seasons, or the prior season, but I doubt any of them changed significantly in relation to each other:

League-Wide Average Ticket Prices:
NFL - $72
NHL - $49
NBA - $48
MLB - $25

So yeah, MLB is still the best deal of the bunch from that perspective. Of course with double the games in a season as basketball and more than double average seating capacity...

Approx. Total Season Attendance (again might be off a bit depending on which year came up first in my search):
NFL - 17 million
NHL - 21 million
NBA - 22 million
MLB - 79 million

So baseball makes it up in volume.

In fact, in some baseball stadiums that actually have the problem that there are so many tickets available for sale that it actually suppresses ticket sales.

Is that, as I've heard, due to league parity rules, trying to keep those teams from drastically out-revenuing the others?

Oh yeah, two more details in the Dodgers' favor. Almost half of that $45 million contract is going to be deferred payments over 5 years, without interest. And, having already cut their payroll, signing Manny means they can shop Juan "How the Fvck Do You Field a Fly Ball" Pierre and his remaining $28.5 million contract around. They aren't going to get anyone to pay that salary for them, but Juan will accept a deferral or other agreement that gets him somewhere that will let him play (if he's lucky he'll be playing at a field like Fenway or Wrigley where there's an outfield he stands a chance of covering).

Man, the Dodgers are looking at a lineup with #7 & #8 hitters that each had a slugging percentage of .460 last year. If they can get hold of enough duct tape to keep their pitchers' arms together for the season, it's going to be a good one.

No, it is because of shopper behavior. Very Broad Example:

Scenario 1:
There is a game on July 16. The stadium seats 100,000. History suggests that 60,000 people will attend.

Before the season starts you are thinking about going to the game on July 16. You don't really care where you sit so long as you're at the game.

Do you buy the ticket now or wait and buy it at the gate? You probably wait.

Then on July 16th it is unusually cold or you have a sniffle or something else comes up and you decide not to go to the game. Team loses a sale.

Scenario 2:
There is a game on July 16. The stadium seats 65,000. History suggests that 60,000 people will attend.

Before the season starts you are thinking about going to the game on July 16. You don't really care where you sit so long as you're at the game.

Do you buy the ticket now or wait and buy it at the gate? Maybe you decide to gamble, but while there's a good chance of tickets being available you can easily imagine something making it a sellout (they announce that Bono will sing the national anthem at that game, the team is on a 19 game winning streak, absolutely perfect baseball weather). So you decide to buy the ticket before the season even starts.

Then on game day if you don't show up for whatever reason the team still has your money.


The Athletics actually did this and it impacted my behavior. They never sell out games and so long as I can sit in a certain range of seats I was happy. Since that range was, for almost any game guaranteed to be available on game day I never pre-purchased tickets.

Then a few years ago they completely closed the third level for all games. Reduced capacity by something like 15,000 seats (from average to the smallest in the majors). So now if I am interested in any specific game that I think will be at all popular I make sure I pre-purchase tickets since I don't want to risk getting there on game day and ending up out by the BBQ pit or behind the foul pole or something.

This is taken to extremes in the NFL where they can frequently say, "hey, you want guaranteed access to one game? Well you've got to buy all 8."

Supply, demand, scarcity. Gotchya.

No such luck

"No Luck" would be if he did come to the Redskins. Good luck to the Bills...

It is amazing how one athlete can be such a cancer. I was actually surprised that the Celtics took a risk on Stephon Marbury for the same reason.

In seeing an interview with Manny Ramirez, though, he seems like a good guy. I don't know anything of him except that one interview, but he doesn't seem like a prima donna.

April's here! April's here! :D :D :D

5 days, 2 hours, and 34 minutes as of this post.

I listened to a Dodger game from Dodger Stadium on the way home. I am happy.

They got one of them classic pitchers' duels going on in Arizona between the D-Backs and the Rockies. 5 innings, 6 homeruns between the 2 teams.

The Dodgers' pitching is a big question mark coming out of spring training, but if that's an indication of what they're up against in their division I'm feeling better already.

Make that 7 homers. And still the top of the 7th.

8. And they're not even playing in Colorado!

Kind of a rough pitching start today. Of the twelve staffs that have yet seen action today, fully half gave up 5 or more runs. And four gave up at least 8.

Yeah, but for once we seem to have good bats. When you have Casey in the #8 spot; you've got a good starting line-up at the plate!

Casey at the bat?

You know he always strikes out in a clutch.

Hey Moonie - nice to see you here.

How is your team looking this year? Any chance you will break .500?

They've got a chance tomorrow to get back up to 500.

I suppose, if you subscribe to a rather liberal definition of the word chance.

Santana starts. Three hours later, K-Rod finishes. The pennant is coming home to Citi Field.

And what's their secret weapon?
They finally have a big Putz.

I love the early days of the season when all the coverage has to use headshots where half the players are wearing the wrong caps.

Well there goes our undefeated season. It's good to get the suspense over with early.

GO DUCKS!!!!!!!!

Who?

*checks rotation of the earth*

The Dodgers beat Peavy! The wonders never cease.

You know, I've always thought it was lame that a run that scores due to a fielding error by the pitcher is considered an unearned run. I look at E.R.A. to mean "average number of runs scored due to this pitcher being on the mound." The pitcher himself making the error would count towards that, in my world.

I always took ERA to indicate the number of runs scored due to that pitcher's pitching. Which would be why runs scored on the pitcher's errors would not be included.

I know that's the reason. I just think it would make more sense to include runs due to his own errors. I mean, ERA is about assessing your chances of winning if, all other things being equal, it's that guy on the mound vs. someone else. It's supposed to say "we expect the other team to score X # of runs, on average, if he's pitching." It seems logical to me to include otherwise unearned runs that are his fault.

In the end, it's rarely more than a run or two a year for any pitcher, so it's not like it matters. It's just always seemed like including those runs would make ERA a more complete statistic.

I never took that to be the purpose of ERA. It seems to me that it is and should be a measure of strictly pitching effectiveness. There are other statistics to measure fielding. And still other statistics to assess overall value.

In the NL, at least, a pitcher's batting affects there ability to win games as well. Should that be factored into ERA?

If you want a measure of a pitcher that includes pitching and fielding then I think Win Shares is what you're after (and in the NL this would also include batting).

ERA isn't a particularly useful number when you get down to brass tacks but like Tom I view it not as a complete measure of the pitcher but rather just of pitching.

No, because I think ERA should be about how many runs the other team is likely to score with that pitcher pitching. And to my mind, that includes errors he's responsible for.

Holy Crap
 

Nick Adenhart, Angels pitcher, killed in Fullerton crash
How bizarre and tragic. He was the starting pitcher and left the game with his team winning. I drove near the crash site this morning after a blood test (was detoured around it).

Wow

More

Sucks.

That's 2 Angels-related deaths already this season.

Angel's Baseball 2009: It's to Die For™

The Angels have canceled tonight's game in honor of Nick Adenhart

Link

OMG, a Dodger pitcher made it through 7 innings! It's an Easter miracle!

It took me a while to wrap my head around that fourth-out run rule, but I think I've managed to make sense out of it.

Consistency that's the key and no one does consistency like the Nationals.

Six straight games. Same consistent result.

You go guys.

Enjoyed the four-out situation. I'm currently reading As They See 'Em and the exploration of umpiring minutiae is interesting (and I'm feeling pretty bad for umpires in general).

It was news to me that there is a situation where the umpire is required to give the manager an option between which outcome they'd prefer.

What would that be?

Men on first and third, one out.

Batter swings, hit bat hits the catchers glove but he still makes good contact with the ball and drives it to deep right where it is caught by the right-fielder for an out. The guy on third tags up and scores.

The catcher, however, is guilty of interference (it is the catcher's responsibility to stay out of the way of the batter). Under normal circumstances (where the batter was interefered but did not hit the ball) the result would have been:

1. Batter awarded first base.
2. Guy on first advanced to second.
3. Guy on third stays where he is.

However, since a run did result from the play (interference does not immediately kill the play) the umpire must give the manager the option of:

1 out with the bases loaded and no run scored (possibly preferred if you're behind by 5).
2 outs with a man on first and 1 run scored (definitely preferred if it is the bottom of the ninth and the game is tied).

The end of one of the chapters had 15 questions from a test at umpiring school and I only got about 8 right and for 2 of those I had the wrong reasoning.

Looks like I'll be heading to the library at lunch.

Know that this stuff is kind of the background of the book so far, with the focus more on how umpires get to be an umpire and what the life of an umpire is like (not good unless they are the one in 100 who make it to the majors where it still kind of sucks but at least pays well).

But the little technical stuff that sneaks in is pretty interesting to me.

What do ya know, [urlhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rsRzokIYrM&fmt=18]Vinny's a lefty[/url].

What do ya know, Vinny's a lefty

:p

Proof reeding's fro succkers.

;)

I thought his famous catch phrase was "Farmer John pure pork sausage."

And they play the Nat's again tonight, pretty much assuring the streak will go to at least 14 games.

Which would make it the longest home winning streak in Dodger history, start of the season or otherwise.

I'm 99% certain there is only one thing that can end this streak...I'll be at the game Friday.

Yup, that should do it.

Oh FVCK!!

The LA Times article

It's unclear form the article whether the suspension is based on a recent positive test, or his alleged test in 2003.

Oh well. However, unlike with Barry, the question, "Do you think he doesn't know every last thing that he's putting into his body?" could easily be answered, "Yeah."

An ESPN blurb makes it sound like a recent test. He's apparently going to claim it was the result of prescription meds from his private doctor for a medical issue. Dubious.

That's just Manny being Manny.

Manny Ramirez Suspended Following Positive Drug Test -- KTLA

Putting aside the obvious ethical questions for a moment, looking at it from a purely competitive angle, this stands to either completely undo the Dodger season...or be the best thing that could have happened.

The road to disaster is obvious. With Manny gone, they lose their highest batting average, highest on base percentage, and their biggest longball threat. They also lose the intimidation factor that causes pitchers to overextend themselves trying to keep the batters in front of him off the bases leading to mistakes. And they lose the intangible clubhouse leadership he's shown, seemingly instantly transforming last year's loose bunch of inexperience kids with "potential" into a potent disciplined team. You can't overestimate how important all of that is, plus anything that results in more field time for Juan "oh sh*t, a fly ball, what do I do?!" Pierre can't be good.

On the other hand, there are a few factors that give me some confidence. First off, they've got a 6 1/2 game cushion right now. They can afford a bit of a stumble and still right themselves. And they should have the ability to do just that. Manny's good, but he was hardly carrying the team. 7 of their 8 regular starters have 13 or more RBI, and Manny is only #2 on the list. Ethier (the RBI leader) has matched Manny's 6 homers, with Blake just one behind. Ethier's also scored as many runs as Manny, Hudson scoring one more than both. So it's hardly an impotent offense without him.


And then there's the time off. Manny's old. He's already got a gimpy hamstring this season. I was pretty much expecting him to hit the DL at some point this season,at least once. Now, instead of stringing that injury along until he inevitably does something more serious, only to be hurried back without fully recovering from THAT, he's now got 2 months to let that little bit of a strain heal properly and then get back closer to 100%.

If Mannyless Dodgers can remain competitive until July, they'll be in position to really punish the league once he does return. And getting some experience winning without Manny can only improve an offense that's already proven far better than they were last year.

It will still be a big hurdle to get along without the cornerstone piece of the offense, but there's a pretty serious upside if they pull it off.

Spoiled in case anyone's recording the game...

Oh hell. I guess I deserved that.

But snidery aside, my point still stands. Can't blame a pitching collapse on lack of Manny.

On the bright side, the onus is off you for tonight's game. So go and enjoy yourself. Have a Dodger Dog.

Speaking of "Dodger Dogs"

When the Nat's built their new stadium they included a couple of "Taste the Majors" food stands.

The concept was that they would bring in food from other major league teams such as official Dodger Dogs. However the Dodgers, and other teams, refused to sell them the various items.

Too bad, it would have been fun.

Perhaps, but I think it may also be a recognition that the famous stadium foods aren't really all that good and rely heavily on the very specific mob psychology of the individual park (admittedly, I've never had a Dodger dog but have had the "really, this is what people talk so much about?" experience at many stadiums.)

It's kind of like everybody loves their own team's radio announcer (everybody is hyperbole) but finds everybody else's subpar.

I have never had food at any professional or collegiate sports stadium or arena that was anything above the "doesn't suck too horribly" level. This is with the exception of a TGI Fridays restaurant that is in Chase Field. And really, that wasn't that good either.

That's my point, stadium food is generally only good (though though the Ichiroll sushi at Safeco was decent enough) when you've formed a close emotional association of the food with the team your supporting.

I have to have a certain type of nachos almost every time I go to an A's game. They're awful but they're tradition. Offer them to me at Wrigley and I wouldn't be interested.

I'll grant it on the Dodger Dogs (even I honestly only enjoy them out of tradition), but Vin Scully is the exception to the announcer rule. I can't say I've ever heard anyone say, "Eh, Vin Scully's not all that."

I've never understood the attraction of him. But a large part of that may very well be that I can honestly say I almost never care a lick about what he's speaking of. No matter how well you say it, that deflates the presentation.

By no means am I saying he's bad, though. But him, talking about the Dodgers, does absolutely nothing for me. And if he were to suddenly switch to working the A's I'm sure eventually I'd love him too (though since Bill King died I am just now finally coming around to Ken Korach as the lead and I still haven't taken to Vince Contronio).

Wow, that was an abysmal game for Rafael Furcal. Defensively and offensively he was uncharacteristically sloppy.

Huh.

Post Manny the Dodgers are winless and the Nat's haven't lost a game.

I think more relevant is the fact that this all started happening when a couple Kardashian sisters showed up to a game. Manny gets suspended, Dodgers can't win. Furcal can't play. Yup, I blame the Kardashians.

It was great fun to shout Merkin - and I did have a dodger dog - the classic with stuff other than beef in it, as well as peanuts and cracker jacks (I think they've changed the formula on the latter). Great fun all around.

Last time we had Cracker Jacks at the stadium, there were about 3 peanuts in it. And the "prizes" are freaking lame history lessons. I've given up on Cracker Jacks.

Yes, but what do you wave in the air when we all sing "Take me out to the ball game"?

I'm a curse at sports games. Whenever I go, "my" team never wins.

Some other things, named in the lyrics, that you could wave in the air:
peanuts
balls
roots
your back
your shame

Sure the last one's a little abstract, but it would make for fascinating people-watching at the game.

My first trip to Dodger stadium. It was a lot of fun.


BANANA!

I DID wave peanuts.

I did NOT see you waving your balls around.

My roots are not showing at the moment since I have freshly-dyed hair.

Regarding "back" and "shame" - I'm trying to avoid getting the song stuck in my head, so I refuse to sing it now to figure out what you're talking about here.

NOOOOOOOO!



Damnit!

I've given Juan Pierre a lot of grief over the years, but damnit if he hasn't shut me up. Not only is he playing absolutely retardedly well on offense, the past couple of games he actually seems to have grasped that when a ball is hit in the air in his general direction, he should be running towards where it's likely to fall down from the sky.

You know, I'm starting to wonder where Manny dumped his left over performance enhancing drugs...

Yea! I get to see a game at Dodger Stadium this year.

Friday August 21st vs Cubs.

The A's are doing their part to make sure I don't have any athletic distractions through the summer.

I painfully had to give up four tickets to tonight's game. Including parking.

Were you waterboarded?

Section 117.

Frickin reality

How's it gone since?


Fun series to watch against the Mets. It was ugly, and the Mets lost more than the Dodgers won. But all three of those games were games that they would have found a way to lose last season. Despite playing pretty poorly over all, they managed to keep themselves in the games and take advantage of the Mets' playing even worse, a good sign for a team.

And exactly what I was talking about when I said Manny being out may turn out to be a net positive. If they're winning games like that without Manny, just wait until they have him back! (assuming he's "him" without his fertility drugs).

Under the laws of sportwriting cliché, if the Dodgers do well without Manny, doesn't his return become a distraction?

Randy Johnson just won game no. 300, with a Brian Wilson four-out save. Only the sixth lefty and 24th overall to join the 300 club. Lots of "Randy! Randy!" cheers from the Nationals fans in DC.

Methinks this will be the last 300 game winner in my lifetime.

Oh, I don't know. Andy Pettite is almost 40 wins ahead of Johnson's pace at the same age. Admittedly, Johnson had two incredible years in his late 30s (24 and 21 wins) but whereas Johnson averaged 14.5 wins over the last eight years, Pettite only needs to average 10 (and he's done better than that every single year of his career but one so far).

By no means a lock but not necessarily a long shot either.

Unless you're expecting to die relatively soon.

Yes, we get quite excited when our teams sets yet another record. Go nats!

And speaking of records...

The Nat's are on course to break the season win record set by the 1962 Mets!

Go Nats!

Now how's THAT for spin!



Any time I see Moonie posting in here, I feel very sympathetic. Like he needs a pat on the head or something...

Hey, at least he gets his pick of seats when he wants to see his local minor league team play. (nothing but good things happened last time I made that joke, right?)

I've been meaning to tell you that I STILL laugh thinking about this post.

The Mets only played 160 games that year, so if the Nats hit 120 in the last two games, I say that record gets an asterisk.

I think Moonie is hoping to hit 120 cumulative wins since they moved to DC in 2005. They are currently 16-46 this season.

Ooh and there is a bonus....

One of the four games we have tickets to this year is Nats vs the Diamondbacks.

A true battle of Champions!

Ps...

Kudos to the Mannyless Dodgers. Nice to see they don't need the egomaniac to do well.

As a Dodger, he hasn't acted in the least like an egomaniac. And he's had every opportunity to do so. From boosting them to their best season in 2 decades, to the extended contract negotiations, to this embarrassing suspension, he's had ample chance to be anything but the gracious business-like player he's been.

Maybe it's just a matter of time, but even during his supposed tantrum in Boston, I didn't really see anything egregiously selfish or egomaniacle from him. The whole thing smelled more of Scott Boras's ego than Manny's.

Appeaser

These kind of disrespectful acts would only come from someone who thinks they are just better/more important that anyone else.

Do the revelations of Sosa and positive tests for steroids do further damage to baseball, or is it old by now?

I think all positive tests for steroids should result in your records being thrown out. Just my opinion of course, and I'm not a fan, obviously. What do you hard core fans think? Mark McGuire (how do you spell McGuire????), Bonds, all of them.

I don't care as a point of baseball statistics. All the performance enhancing drugs should be legal, in my opinion. Or make Tommy John surgery and laser eye correction illegal. Every record comes with its asterisks. And at the time they were taking them (assuming they've stopped) many weren't against baseball's rules or even against the law.

What bothers me most about the Sosa news (and the A Rod news before it) is that those drug tests were only agreed to because the results were supposed to remain completely confidential.

To the extent that it is now against baseball's official rules (even if I think it shouldn't be) I agree it should be punished and harshly. But I don't hold it against the game.

I'm not sure why Scaeagles is limiting his question to porn addicts, but I'll weigh in.

Baseball is odd in that the statistics are revered to a degree they are in no other sport even though the basic dimensions of the game are not standardized from field to field and keep changing.

Yankee Stadium was built with its short right field porch for Babe Ruth, and the ball was livened up in the '30s-1930 in particular-producing a spate of 50-homer seasons. In 1968, the mound was raised for a year, Bob Gibson had a 1.12 ERA and Denny McLain won 31. That was not deemed exciting, so it was lowered again. In the '90s, the ball was livened anew, ballparks got smaller and foul territory started disappearing.

I don't like the view that the owners/powers that be can turn the sport into whatever slow pitch, beer league offensive circus they want to but that players who use performance enhancing drugs somehow damage the integrity of the game. I'm un-libertarian enough to support a view that their use should be banned because they're unhealthy, kind of icky, and you don't want to be encouraging millions of young kids to use them, but I don't think statistics should be thrown out. It is, however, amusing to imagine Mark Reynolds and Adam Dunn asking to have their strikeout records thrown out because they were on drugs.

The freeway series was fun to watch this weekend. Not just because the Dodgers took 2 of 3 (should have won the first, that was disappointing) but particularly because it was hilarious to hear the Dodger fans out-cheering the Angels fans at Angels stadium. I can just imagine the poor confused saps in red in the stands. "What are they doing? There's no music playing. The big screen is telling them to cheer. Why are they making all of that noise? Shhhhh, I'm trying to ignore a game!!!" Wish I'd planned ahead to attend one of the games.

Okay, so that wasn't just me perceiving that.
___________

And how is it that Manny can start playing MINOR league games before his suspension is up? That just don't seem right to me.

Because that's how baseball rules are written. And it makes sense to me. Not allowing him to play minor league games would effectively mean his suspension is MORE than 50 games. He can't just come back after taking 50 games off and start playing on the major league club without a minor league warmup. So it would be a bit unfair to call it a 50 game suspension and then make it impossible for him to return after 50 games.

Lovin' the Dodgers right now. And not just because I watched Ethier hit 3 home runs tonight.

On the Manny question. The suspension is unpaid. Is he playing the minor league games for free or is he now on a minor league contract?

Watched as in at the game?

I believe Manny's playing for free.

Nope, just on TV unfortunately, but we did have dodger dogs!

"That's the old little league home run." Hah!

He's back.

Bleh.

I know. Fvcking Shawn Kelley.

I'm interested in seeing what the fate of Juan Pierre is right now. I really liked him in that lead off spot and am a little bummed that he is going back to the bench after really stepping up and performing for the team when they needed him. I've really enjoyed watching him play for the Dodgers on a daily basis. My dad suspects they will now trade him, and I tend to agree, and I think that kinda sucks.

I can say nothing bad about how Juan Pierre played in Manny's stead. Couldn't have hoped for anything better. But with Manny back he is undoubtedly #4 in line for starting. And unfortunately he just doesn't offer much coming off the bench. Between Furcal and Hudson (though neither is AS much of a speed threat as Pierre), they've got speed in the lineup still. And this being his 11th season, Pierre's long term value is questionable. So while he's largely redeemed himself of the opinion I had of him prior to this season, if the Dodgers can take advantage of the temporary inflation of his stock to shore up a pitching staff that's missing a true 5th starter and seeing way too many inning being thrown by the bullpen, then I can't really feel like it sucks to trade Pierre. Especially if it means he'll have an opportunity to be a valuable starter elsewhere instead of going back to being a so-so bench player.

You and Jeff Miller should go grab a beer together.

All good points and I agree that this is a good time for him personally to perhaps go elsewhere. I'll still miss him if he goes. He's been fun to watch.

Baseball rule quiz question:

How can a pitcher be both the winning and losing pitcher in the same game? (Hint: It almost happened yesterday)

Ok, I had to use Google for that one....

It didn't almost happen yesterday, because the guy didn't play his old team. Letter of the rules notwithstanding, if I was the ump, I'd apply any number of accepted rules of statutory construction to say that it can't happen, anymore than trading players between teams in the middle of an ongoing game can happen.

It almost happened in that 3/4 of the circumstances were there.

Let's see. Rangers and Rays have a tie game halfway through the ninth (though ninth isn't necessary). Bob The Pitcher pitches the top half for the Rangers. Game suspended due to rain, it was a Sunday game in May and the teams won't again play until August.

In the interrim, Bob the Pitcher gets traded to the Rays and in August the game resumes. The Rays put in Bob the Pitcher and he immediately gives up a 2 run homer.

Bob the Pitcher gets the loss for the Rays (and a blown save) and the win for the Rangers.

Do I win a cookie?

Resumed games allow all sorts of oddities (I have no idea if this is route to GD's almost, I haven't read any sports news from yesterday) such as the fact that some sources list Barry Bonds Major League debut several months before the first day he actually plays since his first appearances was in the late summer resumption of a game started early in the season.

So I assume the first three of the following (if my scenario was the right one) happened yesterday but the pitcher didn't lose the game?

Suspended game
Pitcher traded from Team A to Team B
Pitcher resumes game (or plays in resumed game) for new team.
Pitcher loses game for new team.

That's the scenario, but the rules also provide that umpires can decide on any situation not specifically covered by the rules, which, I submit, this is not. If I was d'ump, I wouldn't allow it.

If it could happen, it would also suggest that if half of two teams got thrown out during a bench clearing brawl in a game that was suspended, and then they all got traded for each other, they could all reappear in the resumed game.

On opposite teams? Players kicked out before suspension, I'm thinking, would still be barred from the game since once kicked out you are not allowed in the dugouts or onto the field in the same game.

Once resumed it is still technically the same game so I'm guessing you still wouldn't be allowed on the field regardless of who you were playing for (though an interesting alternative would be you get kicked out, the game is suspended, you retire, the game resumes and you want to watch from the stands. Should you be allowed since a kicked out player can't watch from the stands?).

But who knows, the rulebook covers the entirety of resumed game substitutions in a middling length paragraph. Though I say that since the rule book doesn't cover it the umpires would probably allow it.

Ooh, ooh! I have something to post here!

Baseball numbers geeks rejoice! Either that or their heads will explode.

I like my baseball defense in flashy broad strokes:

Can he make circus catches?
Can he run down well hit balls?
Can he throw a runner out at third from right field?
Can he make a strong throw to first from deep in the hole?

Two million bits of defensive increments don't interest me, and I predict they won't interest anyone for long.

Unfortunately that first one is frequently a sign of a less then stellar defensive player.

The big problem I see for this system (which I agree will be of no interest to most fans) is that unlike other statistical databases this one can't help but be extremely proprietary so until I know how they're planning to make money off the system and share the data I can't get excited about its meaning to stat oriented fans.

I can't wait until they adapt this to politicians so that we can end all those debates too.

:D

Here's a video of the top 25 catches of all time.

I predict even the most hardcore baseball fan here will watch this and say "Who gives a f***?"

Hey, the Ashes just started. If it were easily available on my TV I'd be watching some of it.

Amazing how expectations change when you take the glove away.


Matt Kemp demonstrated 3 of the 4 in the last 2 days. And given a chance to learn shortstop I Bet he'd be able to add the 4th. It's a shame he's not already on the All Star roster, I certainly hope the final vote ends in his favor.

Jonathan Sanchez just threw the first no-hitter in 33 years for the Giants. He was perfect until an error in the 7th.

Frequently but not always.

When Juan Pierre makes one of his frequent circus catches it's more often than not because he thought the best route to the ball involved taking a quick nap and starting in the opposite direction and only his speed saved him from embarrassing himself.

Whe Matt Kemp makes it, it's more often than not because he covered more ground than should be humanly possible and got an out that most center fielders couldn't have even considered making.

I agree! Makes me wish I had used a word that meant something other than always.

Seriously, you should be more precise with your diction. And your word choice.

Oh, and without anyone noticing the Giants have crept into 1st place in the NL wild card, by two games. Sure, it's only halfway through the season, but this is the best they've done since 2003.

That was a pretty generous error call. Well hit ball, bad hop, would have taken a good play to get the out. Ah, the advantage of the home scorer.

ETA: Not saying it was illegitimate. Just one of those calls that under different circumstances could have gone the othery way. I would have like, for instance, to see the scorer's head explode if Juan Uribe were an inning away from an error-less inning streak record.

Heads explode all the time in baseball.

No-hitters are overrated. No Mets pitcher has ever thrown a no-hitter, and they've done just fine. In 1969, at the second game I ever went to, Bob Moose of the Pirates no-hit the Mets. The Mets won the World Series that year. A few years later, Bob Moose was dead.

No wonder Angels fans suck. They're coddled.

I don't like free ice cream!

:) You just are never going to like Pierre are you?

What if you paid for it?

Who pissed in your Cheerios this morning?

Unpissed Cheerios are overrated.

Fvck Bud Selig, fvck making it count. It's an exhibition game! I don't give a rats ass who wins. I want to see guys swinging for the fences and pitchers throwing brushback pitches for comedic effect.

Meanwhile, the stupidest comment I've seen this year re: the all star game. "They should stop letting the fans vote, it turns into a popularity contest."

Really? The All Star game becomes a popularity contest? The horror!! :rolleyes:

They should just stop playing it period. Or do it after the season if they must.

Or, at least stop letting people vote for the All Stars starting with the second game of a 162 game season (only 45% of which can even be taken into account for determining who that seasons All Stars are). And dump the "every team represented" rule. If you can't put one person on your term worthy of an appearance then pound sand.

But mostly, just stop having the game.

And I take it the NL lost again.

They did, but that has little to do with my distaste for it counting. Baseball generally has the smallest homefield advantage of any of the major sports, so who gets it is relatively irrelevant. I just miss the more fun tone the game used to have. Bleh.

Today, by the way, is officially the worst day of summer. Not a shred of MLB activity. Depressing.

I'm getting nervous. As much as the Dodgers need a strong starter, I'm not pleased to hear the names Kershaw and Kemp come up as possible trades. I think Colleti is smarter than that, but you never know.

IMO, now's the time to make some moves with the wealth of farm hands the Dodgers have. The past couple of seasons, it was the constant supply of inexperienced but massively talented players coming up and filling holes that has been keeping the Dodgers going. It would have been suicide to trade them, not knowing which ones would turn out to be the long term winners. But now with Kemp, Loney, Ethier, Kershaw, solidified as legitimate major leaguers and the verterans remaining healthy, now the Dodgers can afford to use the value they have in their system to get the pitching they need to make it to the end. They may not get Haliday, but with names like Blake DeWitt, Xavier Paul, and plenty of others they can pick up a good arm without breaking up the winning team they've got in the bigs right now.

I'd even rather see James McDonald go before Kershaw. He'll be a good starter in a couple years, and he's a big help in the over worked 'pen right now, but if they pick up a starter that can get some innings that becomes less of an issue.

^ Ugh, getting rid of Kershaw or Kemp would be ludicrous. I would also be fine with McDonald going.

Oh, and nice pinch hit, Manny.

With no batting practice, no less.

Less than 2 weeks later, Johnathan Sanchez gets upstaged

Perfect games are overrated.

Actually, I bet if you look at the ratio of Hall of Famers/potential Hall of Famers/All Stars to lucky bums among the few perfect game throwers, I bet it's far higher than with simple no hitters.

Well, ignoring anything after 1989 since those pitchers potentially can still be inducted, 5 of the 10 modern era perfect gamers went on to be inducted.

There have been 264 no-hitters (248 if you discount the 19 perfect games). There are only 72 pitchers in the Hall of Fame total. So, without combing through all 263 to account for pitchers with multiple no-hitters I think it's a safe bet that yes, a higher percentage of pitchers that threw perfect games have made it to the hall than those that "just" threw no-hitters.

But then, simply the comparative rarity (1/14th the number) is probably evidence enough of how much more significant an accomplishment it is.

Hard to say, out of the 11 modern era perfect games where the pitcher is eligible for the Hall of Fame, five of them are in the hall (and one also became a U.S. Senator).

Of the remaining five eligible (Kenny Rogers, David Wells, David Cone, Randy Johnson, Mark Buehrle) at least one will definitely be going (Johnson). So that is a minimum of 37.5% representation from the games elite.

That said, Nolan Ryan is in the Hall of Fame as well and I believe he alone accounts for 73% of all no hitters thrown in the modern era.

Ryan also accounts for 100% of the worst ass whipping Robin Ventura ever took.



I can't wait to see or hear Rickey Henderson's HoF induction speech this weekend. I want to know if "Rickey thinks Rickey is humbled by this honor".

One of my favorite highlights ever. I thought Ventura was an idiot--at least until he played for the Mets, had some good years and hit that grand slam single.

Poor Manny. Between the release of the absolute nothing that is the Lebron James dunked-on video and the perfect game, his grand slam disappeared off the highlight reels faster than a plate of spaghetti at Tommy Lasorda's dinner table.

My god ESPN's baseball coverage is insufferable. I may never complain about Lyons, Steiner, and Eric Collins again.

Ah, three blowouts in a row. Oodles of runners LOB. And the icing on the cake, pinch hitter Mark Loretta taking the mound for the first time since 2001. I fear this is going to be one hell of a road trip.

First 3 game losing streak since of the season. Actually, first since Manny was acquired last season if memory serves. Frustrating games to watch as they were all winnable. Out of 26 innings, there were maybe 5 or 6 bad ones for Dodger pitching. But boy were they bad. And then the bizarre disappearance of clutch hitting. It's not like they weren't hitting or anything. If someone told me only that the Dodgers had 11, 11, and 9 hits respectively in the 3 games I'd have put them on a 3 game winning streak. But they just couldn't string any together at the right time. And WAY too many double plays. Seemed like they hit into one just about every inning.

All right, I'm fully aware that the Dodgers paid good money for Broxton and, therefore, it wasn't unreasonable to bring him in to close things out in the 9th, especially when the starter is well over 100 pitches. But geez, Kershaw gave perhaps his most impressive appearance to date, and in the 8th, was still throwing around 95 MPH and retiring batters with ease. Let the kid have his first complete game shutout. I believe he could have shut them down quickly in the 9th, but instead, I got to watch an additional 2 hours of baseball as a result, with a very displeasing ending. Ugh. What is going on with this team?

What's going on is that the starters' lack of innings on the first half is catching up with the bullpen. It was bound to happen.

I'm really starting to worry they're going to make a rash trade to either get a starter than can eat some innings or at least a fresh arm or two in the bullpen. I will be sorely disappointed if one of the regulars goes.

Meanwhile, late last night I could be heard to have yelled at my television, "I hate fvcking Pujols!!" That just didn't sound right.

Although, it certainly can't be entirely blamed on the bullpen, because nobody is getting any run support. Between the double plays and failing to get the leadoff guy home, it just seems like nobody is hitting the ball. And were it not for Manny last night, making an outstanding play, we would have seen another lopsided score.

Agreed though, I would rather see them work through it then make a stupid trade decision. I would consider letting McDonald go though. I know he is supposed to have significant potential, but my patience is running thin.

The lack of run support and hitting with men in scoring position this week is problematic. But that can theoretically be fixed with some coaching and studying tape. An exhausted bullpen is an exhausted bullpen and no amount of mechanical corrections or coaching can make that go away.

Agreed on McDonald. I think him and a few AAA kids (and maybe Blake DeWitt) could net to Dodgers some decent upgrades without breaking up the winning formula they've got going.

Oh good, the front office is listening to my advice

It seems pretty clear at this point that Schmidt is not going to be able to fulfill that 5th starter position. I just don't think he has the ability to be that "thinking pitcher" who needn't have a decent fastball (like a Maddux.) In yesterday's game, it looked like he was throwing batting practice.

I'm starting to think that the Dodgers might have been better served by acquiring some starting pitching before the deadline, and I wonder what they are going to do if Schmidt takes another shelling. Granted, I wasn't enamored by he prospect of losing Kemp or Kershaw, but I also don't feel as confident about making it to the playoffs without someone more reliable in that 5th spot. I suppose they could try McDonald there again; he's been pitching a little better, but I don't think that is the answer either.

On an unrelated note, I find it pretty humorous that Mota insists that the pitch to Fielder just got away from him accidentally the other night. If so, maybe someone could explain why Troncoso was warming up in the bullpen with, what, a 13-run lead and two outs in the top of the 9th. :) Not saying that I disagree with the decision to bean him, but I had a hard time keeping a straight face while Mota explained it was an honest mistake.

If Stults can get health I think the Dodgers can get away with 4 men + a platoon of Stults and Weaver as the 5th. It'd be a little tough to manage, but that's basically what they were doing for the bulk of Manny's suspension and it served them pretty well.

We're going to see the Giants take on the Dodgers next Tuesday, the 11th. Expect plenty of in-game Tweets and Twitpics (@SmartWatermelon), especially if the Giants are doing well...

I suppose. Let's just say that I'm not Weaver's biggest fan, so that prospect does little to diminish my unease...




...unless we are playing the Giants. :evil:

Here's hoping that Kuroda is okay and makes a speedy recovery after getting nailed in the head by a line drive tonight. A very scary thing to witness.

Yeah, that was scary. He got VERY lucky and seems to be doing well today, there's even a chance he won't miss a start.

Totally scary. I can't believe that injury wasn't a whole lot worse. But I must say I'd rather have that than have Kevin Youkilis charge me while I was on the pitcher's mound. I love the BoSox but that guy scares me.
:D

Geebus, have things gotten so bad that they're already at the "Let's try throwing a knuckleballer out there," phase?

Ha! Fear the Nats (next season perhaps). Apparently we signed some guy that actually knows how to toss a baseball. It's quite the novel concept for this team.

Heck - they might even break the 100-game mark!

Hey, it's just one guy he ain't the frigging messiah, and who let you back in here anyway?

What was that popping sound?

A shoulder? An elbow? A balloon?

Don't worry, the Nats will soon break him of that silly habit.

Every time I read "Nats" I think "Gnats"

That almost makes sense. But the Nats aren't quite that consequential.

You missunderstood him, he meant with Strasburg they have a chance to not LOSE 100 games (they're currently on pace to go 59-103)

If it makes you feel better about the future consistency in futility for your team (I know I'll be wistfully disappointed when the A's figure once again that winning is the goal), the history of pitchers taken #1 in the draft isn't stellar.

13 in the nearly 45 years of the amateur draft (1965 being the first year).

[Note: I know this post is way overkill but as always I figure if I've interested myself into doing some research I might as well bore everybody with the results.]

David Clyde ('73) - His career consisted of 84 appearances over 5 seasons compiling a record of 18-33 with an ERA of 4.63. Won just 7 games in his first three seasons.

Floyd Bannister ('76) - Did have a decent mediocre career with a final record of 134-143 and an ERA of 4.06. Won 21 games in his first three seasons.

Mike Moore ('81) - Another midlevel career of 161-176 (4.34). Won 20 games his first three seasons.

Tim Belcher ('83) - The relative All Star of this class. Won 34 games his first three full seasons (against 27 losses). Also one of just three in this group to have a career winning average over 50% (146-140/4.16).

Andy Benes ('88) - Similar career as Belcher. 155-139/3.97 and 38-36 in first three seasons.

Unfortunately, Benes was the last #1 picked pitcher to have anything close to an impressive career.

Ben McDonald ('89) - Only 211 appearances with 78-70 record.

Brien Taylor ('91) - Never made it to the majors. Tore his labrum in a fist fight.

Paul Wilson ('94) - 170 appearances, 40-58 record.

Kris Benson ('96) - 203 games, 69-74 record. At 35 he's still bouncing up and down from the majors.

Matt Anderson ('97) - Entire major league career was working middle relief getting maybe 60 innings a season. Was out of the game before he was 30.

Bryan Bullington ('02) - Almost 30 and has yet to have more than 5 appearances in a season and that was 3 seasons ago.

Luke Hochevar ('06) - Still young, obviously, but he hasn't immediately set his career on fire. Kansas City gave him a nearly full season run in last year and he went 6-12. This year he's not any improved.

David Price ('07) - Still young, obviously. This is first real season in the majors. He's currently 5-5.

Yep, and they appear to be getting worse. It looks like Kuroda will go on the DL and Kershaw, who is supposed to start tonight has the flu, and may be replaced by Weaver (begging the question, who will replace Kuroda's slot then?). Smoltz, meanwhile, is signing with the Cards, not that we could have used him or anything.

Compared to what we could see over the next couple of nights, I think I'd rather have the knuckleballer on the mound. He actually pitched a pretty good game.

I'm still looking forward to the game this Friday. No matter what happens to them, the boys in blue will still be several steps up from what I'm used to.

Just a note of team pride.

Just a couple weeks ago the Athletics had the fourth worst record in the league. Now, they have the eighth worst record. LET'S GO OAKLAND!

I'm not saying it wasn't the right move, just bemoaning the fact that the season's fallen so far that it IS the right move. Let's face it, even the best knuckleballers are little more than novelty acts. Loveable entertaining novelty acts to be sure, but to bring one up in the thick of the playoff hunt, especially when the Dodgers were miles beyond the thick just a few short weeks ago, is an act of desparation and a sure sign that they're in bad shape. Which is not in the least surprising having gotten to where they are with essentially a 4 starter rotation that, at best, consists of 4 six-inning starters (let's be honest, 5+). Desparate is a kind term for the pitching situation.

Dodgers acquire Jim Thome and Arizona pitcher, John Garland for a player to be named later.

Where the hell do you put Thome?

I'm not sure I'm liking this, even with the prospect of a lineup that includes Ramirez, Ethier, Kemp and Thome.

But can they use any of these acquisitions during the post season?

As long as the contracts were signed today, August 31. Rosters expand to 40 and post-season eligibility is denied for anyone joining the team starting tomorrow, September 1.

The Giants signed Brad Penney for the pro-rated major-league minimum, around $75K, today as their fifth starter and he will be eligible for post-season play.

1st base. I'm a big fan of Loney, and Thome's a defensive downgrade, but something's not working right for Loney this season at the plate. If Thome can make up for Loney's lack of production and get them through the postseason, Loney's got all off season to get back to form, with Thome being a free agent.

From what I read though, Thome told Colletti right off the bat (pardon the pun) he couldn't play first.

Still, I suppose he's a heck of a guy to have pinch hit, with considerably more power than anyone else on the bench.

It does appear, however, that they will only be giving up Tony Abreu and a minor league infielder, so I'm not feeling quite as bad about the whole thing. Probably a smart move, even if we now have six (or more) starters.

Yeah, just saw that. Hell of a pinch hitter indeed.

Andre Ethier 4 MVP!

Why are we still talking "MLB '09"? The season ended weeks ago. Perhaps we should start an MLB '10 Thread.

What, you don't have your tickets purchased to watch the Nats' race to 100?

My baseball season didn't survive April.

Dodgers!!!

I'm going to see the Dodgers tonight. I expect it to be a historic game!

The Nats are sitting at 99 and could easily make the mythic 100 mark this evening!

On the dark side, the Department of Homeland Defense issued an alert for any entertainment venue where people gather. So there's that to worry about.

Oh, wait, this is a Nationals game. Never mind.

The Nats have removed the standings from the home page of their website.

At least when accessed on my Pre browser the standings are on the Nats home page.

Really? http://washington.nationals.mlb.com/index.jsp?c_id=was

I'm not seeing them. There's a link to them, but they used to be right there on the page and I don't see them.

I don't see "Standings" on the home page of the Dodgers either. You have to find it on "Scoreboard" sub-menu on both sites.


Edited to add: Ahh! Never mind. I see what you mean. Down at the bottom of the page next to the "News and Notes" bubble. Yeah. It is missing on the Nats page.

The web sites are centrally managed by Mlb baseball so ild expect they wouldn't do a different template for just one team.

The version my Pre is getting is mobile customized (grrr) so I guess they didn't change that.

A very quick informal survey shows that the "Standings" box is missing on all some of the teams that have been mathematically eliminated. (Except Tampa who was just eliminated.....)

Unless we're not all being served the same page, that doesn't seem to be it. Lots of teams are now elimated from the playoffs but I just hit each page and only three were showing the Team Leaders box in place of the standings box.

Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Washington. All others still show standings.

Which of course were two of the three teams I looked at in my "quick informal survey".

Huh. Dodgers lost. Go figure.

On a brighter note....

In the bottom of the 8th a towering pop-fly came directly to me. SMACK! Off my hands into the hands of the guy next to me. In all my MLB history (which is deceptively large) that's the first fly ball I ever laid a hand on. Still cool even if I did not get to keep it.

You go into the bottom of the 9th with a three run lead against the team with the second worst record in baseball, and you somehow manage to lose?

Yeah, I don't have much confidence in the post season at the moment.

I hope the Rockies win (they are currently up 4-3 in the sixth) so the Dodgers can claim the pennant by winning a game and not another team losing one.

I'm going to blame it on them thinking a bit too much about the champagne in the locker room.

Seriously?!?

How the fvck do you lose 11-1

To the effin PIRATES!!!

With each passing day, I'm becoming less convinced that we are going to clinch the division, let alone win the first round of playoffs. The team is in meltdown mode and we can't drive in a run to save our lives. Manny, Ethier and Kemp aren't hitting, the bullpen isn't getting it done, and we have Blake and Belliard benched with injuries. They better figure this out quickly or we'll get swept in the first round.

Yankees Shmankees

I disagree (well, the clinching the division part is obviously easy to disagree with).

The offense got wobbly for a bit. That happens. I disagree that the bullpen isn't "getting it done". They weren't given the opportunity down the stretch. With the woeful offense (which I do believe will make a comeback in the playoffs), they weren't exactly given many leads to work with. They blew a couple, sure, but even when a team is doing well that's going to happen once in a while, it just stands out when things are otherwise going bad. I think all that happened that last week+ was a lack of focus due to being a lock for the division (yes, even as poorly as they were doing, a magic # of 1 with that many games left is a lock).

Meanwhile, though the common wisdom is that starting pitching is the biggest ? for the Dodgers going into October, I think their starting rotation is stronger than it's been all season, and one of the strongest in the post season. Team ERA over the last month...3.08, 2nd best in the NL and more than 30 points lower than their league-leading season average. 2.57 in the last 4 games of the season. They don't have any real flash in their starters in the way of Cy Young candidates, but Wolf is a horse, Kershaw can be unhittable, and they've got two winners in the late-season pickups.

As long as Mattingly can remind them how to hit the ball where the defense isn't, I see good things.

Yeah, I was pretty frustrated when I posted that, perhaps not thinking so clearly. It was a hell of a stressful week.

I do think their starting pitchers can pull it off, although I would feel better with Kuroda there. Billingsley is the biggest "if" and I'm not yet convinced that he is back to form. But the bullpen is indeed strong.

Hitting-wise, I think we will be okay, although it would of course be very nice if Manny would turn it up a few notches. It will be interesting to see how much playing time Pierre gets in the postseason.

I think Pierre's playing time hinges more on Ethier and/or Kemp's performance than Manny's. If those two are on their game then I think Joe will feel confident enough to use Pierre as a spark. But if Ethier and Kemp aren't producing, then even if Manny also gets off to a slow start it'll be a better bet to hope Manny's experience will kick in and carry them through it than pull him out leaving it up to Ethier and Kemp to figure it out without as much postseason experience.

Steve Harvey of the LA Times has a lesser opinion of Manny in today's paper.

Errr, try again Harvey. "For the year he's had a meager 63 rbi and 19 homers." Hey Steve, he missed 1/3 of the season. That's a 90/30 pace if it were a full season.

And 1 example of a bad defensive play? Wow, damning.

Why did he miss so many games again? I can't seem to remember.

Okay, that was a cheap shot, I admit it. I have read that he hasn't been even close to the same since he came back, though.

As of Sept. 30th, since his suspension Manny had a .395 on base percentage and a .508 slugging percentage. 13 homers (which is a 28-homer season pace). I think his RBI total's low, but then the rest of the Dodgers weren't doing such a great job of getting on base in front of him.

Not mythic #'s, but "bad" only in relation to mythic #'s.

Great win! In spite of Wolf's shaky start. No, scratch that, because of Wolf's shaky start.

Wolf was nowhere near having his best stuff, and neither was Carpenter. But Wolf sucked it up and got the outs, at least enough of them to hand it over to the more than capable bullpen. Meanwhile the Dodger offense did what it needed to do against a guy who doesn't normally give you that many opportunities. Would have been nice to have fewer men left on base, but you take what you can get against Carpenter. And I'm actually glad they never broke the game open, gave the 'pen a chance to pitch under pressure.

It's nice to see them handle that kind of "test your metal" game early on and so well. They were not playing at their peak, and yet they kept control of the game pretty well throughout.

The Dodgers and Cards set a post-season record for most men left on base in a nine-inning game with 30 (and it was only an 8-1/2 inning game).

And if I recall correctly, I think they also set a record for longest nine-inning game at just under four hours - though I am not sure if I heard that one correctly.

So is it too early to start thinking of Word Series Match ups?

Dodgers v Yankees: A must watch
Dodgers v Twins: Meh
Dodgers v Angels: All Cali would be cool
Dodgers v Redsox: It could come to blows in my house.

Unless the Athletics somehow end up back in the hunt, all four are in the "meh" camp for me.

Though I'll root for Rockies vs. Twins just because I like to watch network TV executives cry.

Bah! I won the right to buy pre-sale ticketsf for the NLCS this morning, but got distracted by packing for vacation and totally forgot. Ah well, the only game we might have been able to go to is on a Friday and isn't guaranteed to even be a night game. Guess we'll just wait until the World Series.

Well, that was painful to watch.

I still cannot understand why Torre would pull Wolf so quickly in the last series, yet leave Kershaw in for so long when he clearly couldn't find the strike zone. I understand the idea of giving him a little extra time to try and pull himself together, but that clearly wasn't happening. After walking two guys and Howard coming to the plate, you simply have to pull him before things get out of hand. And Elbert was warm in the pen. I love and trust Torre, but WTF???

Still, we did come out more aggressive than last year, and it was nice to see Manny plant one in Mannywood and Loney swing the bat well. But we also gave away home field advantage. I can only hope today turns out much better - that Padilla looks the same as he did in his last start and that Pedro chokes. It would also be nice to see Blake return to form.

He left Kershaw in an inning too long last series too and it almost cost them. It's weird.

Just one game, and one that they were competitive, the didn't look overmatched or anything. This one's got a long way to go.

A couple of comments from today's game:

It still counts! If you walk in the winning run, tough turkey. :p

Does anyone know why there was an entire blue section that was empty just off of home base?

Am I the only one that finds it a bit odd to have a large Casino add on the outfield wall given MLB's stance on betting?

Go Blue.

Off of what? I guess your Nationals, like desperate, sex starved teenagers, get there so seldom, you don't even remember what to call it.

How many points were scored?

Two examples of why baseball sort of sucks:

1) Yankees/Angels use 13 pitchers "playing the percentages"
2) Phillies bring in a closer to "close" an 11-0 win and deprive the fans-and Cliff Lee-of the headline "complete game shutout." Why wait so long to pull Lee? Couldn't the Phillies bullpen be trusted to protect an 8-0 lead after five?

Joe Girardi pulls one right handed reliever for another with two out and nobody on? Royally bitten on the ass. Thank you, baseball gods. You were listening.

Wow, Brox blew it. :( What a bummer.

So, when does Spring Training begin?

The Dodgers pulled a Nat. :(

Confused.
Why did he pull Lackey?
Oy...

LAA is ahead by 1 but I don't know if they can hold onto that lead for long...

By the skin of their wings.
Ufta!

Dude pitched around Matt mother****ing Stairs. Wtf, man? Wtf?