Reality Check :: Return of the King?

Gagne had a rocky start to his season and if his numbers were to stay at this level for the rest of the season (which they won't) his ERA would be an astronomical 18.00. However, his strikeouts per nine would be even higher, 27. The current record, set by Gagne in 2003 is a hair less than fifteen. Even though I am a Giant fan from wayback, it's nice to see that some of the players in the West (both AL and NL) are returning from the DL and ready to help their teams. Ginter was back for the A's, and was on Sports Center's top plays this morning, though he was hitless.

And now, I turn my full attention to the (inexplicably) third place Dodgers. I say inexplicable not because of their blistering start to the season, but because they have simply outplayed the Diamondbacks in absolute terms. The Padres have come on strong, though, and are a different story altogether. While the Dodgers are 22nd in ERA, they are sixth in runs scored, behind the Cardinals. The real problem for the Dodgers has been that their 4.06 ERA in April has jumped up to 5.43 for May.

Choi still can't touch lefties (.222/.417/.333), but with and OBP over .400, it's no wonder why he keeps getting into the lineup, especially on a team run by a sabermetric devotee like DePodesta. Ricky Ledee (315/.396/.467) and Jason Phillips (.290/.328/.411) are hitting well in limited playing time as well, Kent and Bradley have OPS' over .920, and Mr. Injury Risk himself has made it into 35 games with a .254/.385/.421 line to show for it. Kent and Drew have cooled in May so far, with averages in the low .200s. I know that batting average is considered stata non grata but when batters are hitting .212 and .244, it provides meaningful information. Futhermore, in May in 12 starts, Lowe, Penny, Erickson and Perez are 2-8 with an ERA of 5.46. Jeff Weaver (2-0, 3.54 ERA) has been the bright spot in the rotation. These difficulties have put the seemingly invincible Ddogers behind two other teams in the NL West.

Two weeks ago I used a formula derived by Bill James to attempt to isolate luck and remove it from the measure of a team. I'm going to provide a frame of reference before we look at the NL West. For 2004, I've taken the divisional champs, the wild card winners and teams that were in the running the last week of the season for a playoff spot, listed their Runs Scored (RS), Runs Allowed (RA), their winning percentage for the year (WP), their record (W-L), their winning percentage predicted by their RS and RA (PWP), and then their records with that WP (PW-L). I've also listed the Diamondbacks.

           RS   RA    WP    W-L   PWP  PW-L   
----------------------------------------------
Yankees    897  808  .623 101-61 .552  89-73
Twins      780  715  .568  92-70 .543  88-74
Angels     836  734  .568  92-70 .564  91-71
Red Sox    949  786  .605  98-64 .593  96-66
Athletics  793  742  .562  91-71 .533  86-76

Braves     803  688  .593  96-66 .578  94-68
Cardinals  855  659  .648 105-57 .627 102-60
Dodgers    761  684  .574  93-69 .553  90-72
Astros     803  698  .568  92-70 .570  92-70
Giants     850  770  .574  91-71 .549  89-73

D'backs    615  899  .315 51-111 .319 52-110

Some teams overachieved by quite a few wins, most notably the A's and Yankees. I checked the numbers three times for the Yankees; they did indeed outperform their predicted number of wins by 12. None of these teams picked up wins, which is to be expected. Few winning teams get unlucky, because luck is a good part of the reason they win. If we extend this measure to the rest of the league, there is only one major change

           RS   RA    WP    W-L   PWP  PW-L   
----------------------------------------------
Cubs       789  655  .549  89-73 .585  95-67

That's right, sports fans, the Cubs would have made the playoffs in front of the Astros. The point of all this information is to show that while pythagorean wins occasionally incorrectly predict how one good team will finish compared to another good team, it will always predict how a good team will fare against a poor team. I've gone though all this trouble to set up the NL West race.

           RS   RA    WP    W-L   PWP  PW-L   
---------------------------------------------
D'backs    173  193  .590  23-16 .446  17-22
Padres     182  171  .590  23-16 .531  21-18
Dodgers    190  184  .553  21-17 .516  20-18
Giants     170  190  .486  18-19 .445  16-21
Rockies    174  212  .286  10-25 .402  14-21

This is a small sample size, but even in the month of May when they've 'overtaken' the Dodgers, they still have scored less runs then they allowed, and anyone who has the most basic understanding of the game knows that scoring less runs than your opponents is a bad thing. The Giants have virtually identical runs scored and allowed numbers and are four games back. So with all due respect to Tim Kurkjian and Eric Neel the Diamondbacks are not a worst-to-first scenario, and aren't even a good team. If they make it to .500 this year, they need to view that as a monumental accomplishment, because improving by thirty wins is. But if they pin their hopes on winning the West, come September they are going to be sorely dissapointed. The Dodgers are scuffling right now, and once they pull their pitching back together (a rotation that I have infintely more confidence in than in Arizona's) and get Gagne pouring blinding strikes across the plate in the ninth, they will be leading the division. Their lineup is slumping a bit, but they should bounce back, especially with a guy like Kent in the mix. The Padres will be close, and if their young starters stay strong all season the could unseat the Dodgers. It's an outside shot, but the Giants could be, could be in the race if Bonds comes back at a hundred percent. Michael Tucker is hitting .213/.323/.363. For those of you who don't remember, last year Bonds was .362/.609/.812, which indicates that he was on base almost twice as often as Tucker, and Bonds would have legitimate protection from Alou, something he has needed since Jeff Kent left for Houston.

Even with all of that, this is LA's race to lose. The Giants are old and lack real power without Bonds. The Padres are still trying to figure out how to play in PETCO, and how to fit together as a team. The Rockies are a joke, and unless they magically improve their hitting or pitching, the Diamondbacks will drop in the standings.

Remember readers, statistics only lie to you if you let them. We'll give the Beane Boys and the DePodesta Dodgers a week or so before we look in on them again in the next exciting installment of ... Reality Check.

New Blood :: Willy Taveras

Last week the Giants were in Houston for a three game set, and thanks to MLB TV I was able to watch parts of all three. It was nice to get a chance to see my old hometown team, even if I had to listen to the Houston broadcast crew. I saw all of the Thursday game and the most interesting thing I saw wasn't the adequate start from Hennessey, or the loss from Petite. Willy Taveras came up in the third with one out. I hadn't really heard much about Taveras, although I knew that the Astros were using him in their starting lineup. He bunted to the left side of the infield, Hennessey fielded the ball cleanly and threw in what I thought would be more than enough time to get him at first. Taveras beat the throw by at least a half step. A few pitches into Morgan Ensberg's at bat, Taveras took off for second. Metheney is a good fielding catcher (35% CS for his career) and I thought there would be a good chance to get Taveras. I was wrong, as he was in with time to spare. The Ensberg at bat wore on, and as Ensberg took ball four, Taveras took off for third. Again, Taveras was clearly in before the throw. Hennessy pitched out of the inning without surrendering a run, but I realized that Taveras created a first and third one out scenario base solely on his speed. Watching him, it was clear he is blindingly fast, and the impotant thing to realize about his bunt single is that Taveras is right handed, which costs him two steps. The play at first would have been laughable if he was a lefty.

I was curious to compare Willy's first major league season to a few other well known speedsters. The first two lines are for Ricky Henderson, in his rookie year and the year he was 23, the same age as Taveras. Lou Brock at 23 in his first full season is next, then Joe Morgan's first full season and his season at age 23, and finally, Taveras' projected numbers for the year.

       G    AB     R   H   2B 3B  HR  RBI  SB CS  BB  SO   BA   OBP   SLG   
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
R('79) 89   351   49   96  13  3   1   26  33 11  34  39  .274  .338  .336  
R('82) 149  536  119  143  24  4  10   51 130 42 116  94  .267  .398  .382
B('62) 123  434   73  114  24  7   9   35  16  7  35  96  .263  .319  .412
M('65) 157  601  100  163  22 12  14   40  20  9  97  77  .271  .373  .418
M('67) 133  494   73  136  27 11   6   42  29  5  81  51  .275  .378  .411
T('05) 162  590   90  149   9  9   9   41  59  9  45 122  .252  .313  .344 

So while Taveras' numbers aren't mindblowing, they match up fairly well with some of the best basestealers / early-in-the-order hitters of the modern era, and if hitting is indeed contagious, then Taveras is playing on a team that is dragging him down. The Astros are hitting .244, 26th in the majors. The only disturbing stat is that his strikeouts are so high. His minor league numbers also show increases at each level. These may be due to adjustment, and they might be signs of what is to come for this young man. Only time will tell, but for the time being, he is entertaining to watch, and may prove to be a player of note in a few years. Keep your eye on this kid.

Reality Check :: No Joy in Oakland

The A's have continued their dismal hitting, with an ice cold .235 BA and .338 SLG. Worst of all, they're hitting .210 with runners in scoring position, and slugging .265. Like I said last time, these dismal numbers have nowhere to go but up, although I expected that an improvement wouldn't take so long. Injecting Swisher back into the lineup should also help (or at a bare minimum, could hardly make things worse). The Hardball Times recently brought me a ray of sunshine, in the form of Projected OPS(PrOPS). The idea is to eliminate luck in an evaluation of a player's hitting. With that said, here are the numbers for the A's

                    OPS         PrOPS       PrOPS+      PrOPS%      PA
Bobby Kielty        0.724       0.844       -0.120      -16.56%     69
Keith Ginter        0.554       0.842       -0.288      -51.96%     52
Eric Byrnes         0.633       0.803       -0.170      -26.82%     86
Erubiel Durazo      0.734       0.799       -0.065      -8.88%      121
Mark Kotsay         0.755       0.795       -0.040      -5.27%      137
Charles Thomas      0.350       0.759       -0.409      -116.80%    39
Jason Kendall       0.573       0.754       -0.180      -31.48%     125
Scott Hatteberg     0.694       0.752       -0.059      -8.46%      123
Marco Scutaro       0.722       0.744       -0.021      -2.97%      106
Nick Swisher        0.646       0.739       -0.094      -14.52%     84
Mark Ellis          0.684       0.702       -0.018      -2.57%      87
Eric Chavez         0.553       0.691       -0.138      -25.01%     136
Adam Melhuse        0.250       0.556       -0.306      -122.21%    12

(for some reason Bobby Crosby wasn't included)

It's tough to know exactly what to make of this stat, and I intend to contact the author for the full PrOPS (I love that acronym) formula , but all those negative numbers mean that all the A's are getting unlucky at the plate, which, of course, bodes well for a comeback. Keep in mind too that if the A's had held both leads against the Red Sox this weekend, they would be 16-18 and only three back of the Angels. Getting Calero back from the DL should help with these late game collapses. Remember, one of the reasons that Beane traded the people he did was to reinforce the bullpen that was so shaky last year. Another very impotant point I would make is that Barry Zito may be starting to return to form, or at least may be working his way back to above average. He was electric against the Yankees last Friday and missed out on the win due to bad defense. Until the eighth inning he'd only given up one run and his curveball was moving enough to warp the space-time continuum. Billy Beane and Ken Macha need to start reading this blog if they want Zito to turn around; throw him seven and put him on the shelf. A few solid wins could put him back on track. But, I must admit, if I'm still writing like this in two weeks, I might just have to declare this season what it really is, a rebuilding year.

Lollygaggers!

Here's the thing. For the longest time I've wanted to like the Mets, not wanting my contempt for the Yankees to color the whole city of New York. The problem is that for me to like a team, I have to respect them, and the Mets prove year after year all the reasons I shouldn't. The monstrously large contract to Beltran; fine, I'll live with that, he's a good player. Four years to Pedro Martinez; why not, after he throws out his arm you can make him wear the Mr. Met costume. But yesterday's game against the Cubs showed me exactly why I look at the Mets as a traveling circus more than I do a baseball team. Everyone focused on Dempster blowing the save and the walkoff homerun by Derrek Lee, but what interested me most was how the Cubs scored their first three runs.

In the bottom of the second, Jerry Hairston Jr. led off the inning. Victor Zambrano had him in a two strike count when he proceeded to drill Hairston between the numbers with a breaking pitch. No one was worried, because next, in the eight hole was Henry Blanco, or, as we here in Minnesota called him, Henry "The Rally Killer" Blanco. The Confines staff suspects that he generates more than one out per plate appearance, but we still need to go over the data. Blanco hit a low, weak popup that would have been caught by most little league teams under normal weather conditions, and by most major league teams, even with the gusty weather at Wrigley yesterday. Hairston ran the bases brilliantly, giving himself enough time to get back to first if he had to, but was closer to second because he knew what I knew; these are the Mets. The ball dropped in between Beltran and Kaz Matsui and was scored a single.

Now with runners at first and second with the pitcher coming up so early in the game, most teams would charge the bunt, take the out and get on with the inning. Zambrano allowed himself to get so worked up that he'd pitched Prior to a 2-2 count. Then he made an even bigger mistake: a balk. One would now think that Zambrano would go after Prior for the strikeout, or even a groundball to get an out. Zambrano's 2-2 pitch was so far off the plate, even the stellar defense of Mike Piazza could stop it. Hairston scored from third, Blanco moved to third, and Zambrano walked Prior on the next pitch. Patterson was up next and slapped a grounder to Mientkiewicz (who will henceforth be known as "The Doug") who short-hopped a thrwo back to Piazza after stepping on first. The low throw, combined with Piazza flopping backwards like a fish out of water, looking for the ball in front of him, allowed Blanco (a catcher to score from first). Neifi Perez then came up and ripped a ball up the middle that rolled halfway into right center for a single. Prior scored from second on the play.

So the Cubs scored three runs on: a HBP, a 1B (that should have been a team E), a balk,a WP (to the starting pitcher), a BB (also to the starting pitcher), a G3 (and another team E) and a 1B (with a throw so weak that the pitcher scored from second). Two singles, a hit batsman, a walk, a balk, a wild pitch and a groundout. This inning illustrates so clearly why I cannot respect the Mets. If Willie Randolph is any kind of manager, I know exactly what he said in the locker room after the game.

You guys... you lollygag the ball around the infield. You lollygag your way down to first. You lollygag in and out of the dugout. Do you know what that makes you? Larry?
Lollgaggers!
Lollygaggers.

So it's root, root, root for the home team (at Tropicana)

Most of the loyal readers of the Confines know that while we are named for the ballpark on the North side of Chicago, we are actually located in the greater metropolitan area for Minneapolis, and we are all Twins fans. My affection for them is less intense than both Brooks and Aho, who are lifelong Minnesotans. Bearing that in mind, I know that my next statement may draw their criticism; I am desperately hoping that the Twins lose their next series, and even hoping they get swept.

There's only one reason I would wish for such a thing, if the Twins lose this weekend, then the Devil Rays win, and if the Rays win and the Yankees drop two games to the A's, then the Yankees would be in sole possession of last place in the AL East. Think about that. Think of the vindication, the satisfaction, the pure joy that every Yankees hater has waited so long for. My Yankees hatred didn't come to fruition until Game 3 of the 2001 ALDS when Derek jeter made the most improbable play I've ever seen, snapping up a wayward throw to the plate at a full run and flipping over to Posada to tag out Jeremy Giambi at the plate. I've waited for this moment since then. Revenge, as they say, is a dish best served cold.

I've got my finrgers crossed for this one, so, to the Boys in Oakland, give 'em hell, and to the dear hometown Twins, just take these next few off. The White Sox will implode eventually, and the Twins can handle a couple of losses at this point. They might even be as happy as I would be to see the Yankees in last.

Snakes, why did it have to be snakes?

Last year, through the month of April, the Diamondbacks were 9 and 13 and well on their way to a dismal 111 loss season. This season, after the third day of May, Arizona is 15 and 11, and has at one point in the season actually had the division lead. How did a team that said goodbye to Randy Johnson last year turn themselves from a laughingstock to a contender?

Partly, they've used the New Detroit Tiger theory. This was also recently employed to a lesser extent in Seattle and in New York in the NL. This, simply, is to overpay for (mediocre, in some cases) talent. Even though the Diamondbacks have proved themselves to be a franchise that values winning, they don't have the (healthy) star slugger that powers a lineup (and draws fans). The ridiculous contracts are ridiculous by design. Ownership wanted to pay Ortiz, Glauss, Vazquez and Green far more than they would see elsewhere so that they could lock them in and field a team that might hit .500. The Mets and Mariners could sign better players for the payroll that went to those four players (almost 47 million dollars, take your pick, Beltre, Vazquez or Beltran, all between 11 and 12 for this year) so their strategy looks a bit different.

Now to these new D'backs. Vazquez has been a bust, with and ERA over 5 (but he does have a record of 3 and 2). Ortiz has been "Old-slow-and-steady" with a ERA around 3.5. Green and Glauss have been hitting in the low .270s and Glauss has had some power. Certainly adding Green and Glauss (if they don't get hurt) is a needed power infusion for the lineup, but if everyone in the NL West was healthy, this is probably the least dangerous offense, with the possible exception of the Padres, or the Rockies away from Coors. The staff is, at best, margnially improved. All due respect to Johan Santana (but not to Clemens, who got damn lucky that the Cy Young voters don't know any math more complicated than addition, subtraction, division and multiplication), but Johnson was the best pitcher last year. Somehow everyone overlooked that he threw one of only 17 perfect games ever pitched. He dominated every statistical category but wins. I know that his trade set up the trade for Green, but I think this is a much better team with Johnson and Ortiz as the starting two. While I don't fault the Diamondbacks for trying to get younger, they could have tried to get someone better than Vazquez in return.

Halsey (2-0, 3.21) and Webb (3-0, 3.24) have been the bright spots in the rotation thus far, both young and relatively unknown. Luis Gonzalez has started to get back to his old form and is hitting .298/.376/.479 so far. These numbers don't look great, but I'm sure that Gonzo sees them as an improvement over 2004 when he went .259/.373/.493 in only 105 games. The most dominant player on the team has been Lyon, who has ten saves in eleven chances.

This is a team that is, even with the loss of Johnson, better than they were last year. That having been said, this appears to be a team that has been very lucky. So far the Diamondbacks have scored only 111 runs so far, and have given up 121. Even a glance at these numbers would suggest that the D'backs have been getting fortunate breaks.

Just a little chart for you here

Team	Runs Scored	Runs Allowed	Record
Diamondbacks	111	121	15-11
Dodgers	130	106	16-9
Twins	114	95	15-9
Braves	100	79	15-10
Cubs	122	116	12-12

The Dodgers, Twins and Braves are there to illustrate the RS (runs scored) and RA (runs allowed) of teams with similar records, and the Cubs are there to show that teams with worse records have better ratios.

There's a measure known as Pythagorean Win-Loss Records, which is caculated by RS^2 / RA^2 + RS^2 and is designed to measure how good a team is excluding luck.

Here are the predicted winning percentages for those last teams, and the record they would have at this point in the season

Team	EXP W%	EXP Record	Dif
Diamondbacks	.457	12-14	-3
Dodgers	.601	15-10	-1
Twins	.595	14-10	-1
Braves	.646	16-9	+1
Cubs	.525	13-11	+1

Why are the Diamond backs even close, then? Well, the Dodgers have seen more streaking lately than a college campus during pledge week, the Padres are hurt and still adjusting to Petco, and the most dangerous man in baseball is still rehabbing his knee. Expect the Diamondback to fade into the desert night, unless they start playing better. You can only outrun the inevitable for so long.

Reality Check :: Silver Lining

This is the begining of what will be a fixture here on the Confines. For the last few seasons, various figures in the baseball world have launched a campaign to convince the world that Billy Beane and his sabermetrics are ruining the game of baseball. Paul De Podesta has come under the same attacks (although oddly enough, not Theo Epstein. I guess if you win all is forgiven) for the moves he's made with the Dodgers. The purpose of this column is to look, honestly, at the record, at the statistics, and at the payroll, to see if these men are indeed crazy, or if they are crazy like foxes.

From time to time I may invite the other Confines writers to join in this series. I am by far the most sabermetric-minded of the group. Brooks walks the line between traditional wisdom and the 'new baseball math', and Aho is firmly of the old guard, though he does keep up with the newer stats.

So, without further ado, the first edition of ... Reality Check.


The Oakland Athletics have had a disappointing begining to their season, last in their division at 9 and 11. Even worse, the A's have a team batting average of .229, dead last in the majors and haven't scored in the last 22 innings. There is no point in talking about the Dodgers right now, as there is nothing to critique or quantify. I don't think they are a team that is good enough to keep up this pace all season, which would get them 110 wins. 100, however, is not out of the question.

The A's have signs for encouragement, though. They are sixth for ERA (3.65) thus far and if the offense pulls it together, they should be able to make a run at winning their division in what is a rebuilding year. Even if you hate the A's (which I find personally hard to imagine, but to each their own) you can't believe that Chavez won't improve on his .171/.256/.276 ([BA/OBP/SLG] career .274/.352/.497), that Jason Kendall wont improve on .233/.300/.274 (career .305/.386/.415). Durazo .203/.286/.275 (career .282/.383/.489) and Byrnes .182/.250/.364 (career .268/.333/.457) will also move back towards normal as the season goes on, and Crosby is on the DL. When all of this is taken into account and the A's find themselves only three off the division lead , they've got every reason to be optimistic.

The pitching staff has carried this ball club so far, with 7 pitchers with sub-2.10 ERAs and 6 with ERAs of 1.75 or below. These 7 account for nearly 82 innings of the 175 thrown this year. They also have nearly 40 innings from pitchers with ERAs less than 1. The bright spots are obviously Joe Blanton and Rich Harden. Harden has the lowest ERA in the AL (like Clemens, only one ER on the season), and his K/9 is 9.3. He has stepped up in a big way from last year. Blanton threw a fantastic game on Sunday Night Baseball this week. He made one bad pitch to Steve Finley in the seventh and lost because of it. Finley jumped on it and sent it flying into the right-centerfield seats.

Blanton's line for the game:
8.0 IP, 6 H, 1 R, 1 ER, 1 BB, 2 SO.
For the year:
25.2 IP, 18 H, 6 R, 5 ER, 6 BB, 7 SO.

The important thing to note about Blanton is his experience, or lack thereof. Last year he threw eight innings in the majors. Eight. None of those were in starts, and he's shutting down the Angel's lineup four starts into the season. Just ignore his 0-2 record, because it doesn't mean a damn thing. This guy could be very, very good.

Zito has proved himself an enigma this season, once again. If you take out his horrible start against the Devil Rays, his ERA is 4.68, which is not great, but respectable. He's also had two good starts that have been marred by late declines, both of which have come against very good lineups, the Angels on the 15th and the white hot White Sox yesterday. Against Anaheim he threw eight strong innings, only surrendering two runs in the seventh. Last night against the Sox, Zito threw six scoreless, but gave up four in the seventh. In both starts he threw just over 115 pitches.The splits from ESPN's stat page paint a clear picture of what is happening. Zito is tiring in the later innings and pressing to make pitches. In the first inning, batters are hitting .167 off him. Innings one through three, .276; innings four through six, .196. The problem comes in the seventh, eighth and ninth, when he's being hit at a .467 clip. It's is even more obvious looking at average by pitch counts. From 76 to 90, batters are only hitting .143, but from 91 to 105 they're hitting .357. Slugging also jumps from .143 to .429. With the strength the A's have in the bullpen, if I was managing I'd keep Zito on a short leash and pull him before he got into the mid 90s for pitch counts. Working the bullpen for an extra inning every fourth or fifth day is certianly worth the wins, and worth getting Zito's confidence back up. I already mentioned Crosby on the DL, but A's bullpen staple Chad Bradford could be back as soon as mid-June to help as well. The Angels should fear this team, because for as badly as they're playing, they're still in the thick of things, and they are very, very likely to improve.

In a few weeks, we'll check back on the boys in green and yellow, as well as the boys in blue. There's not much to say about the Dodgers right now, except that Hee Seop Choi is hiting (a predictable) .205, but with Kent and Bradley over .350, it doesn't really matter. Just remember, baseball fans, the three most important things in statistics are sample size, sample size, and sample size.

Bad Blood in the Central

Just when the White Sox make you respect them, just when they've gained some semblance of character, they go and do something like this that reminds you of the attack on the umpire, of the drunken fans, of why it seems so appropriate that AJ Pierzynski is playing there.

The quotes in the Chicago Sun Times article read like so --

"He never was my friend because I don't know him," Guillen said. "If he thinks what I said hurt him, I don't give a [bleep]. I didn't come here to make friends, I came here to win games. I've got a lot of friends. If Magglio doesn't want to be my friend, I'm not going to lose sleep at night."

Guillen only was warming up, though. He saved his best for last, launching into an expletive-laced torrent of insults.

"He's a piece of [bleep]," Guillen said. "He's another Venezuelan [bleep]. [Bleep] him. He thinks he's got an enemy? No, he's got a big one. He knows I can [bleep] him over in a lot of different ways.

"He better shut the [bleep] up and just play for the Detroit Tigers. Why do I have to go over and even apologize to him? Who the [bleep] is Magglio Ordonez? What did he ever do for me? He didn't do [bleep] for me. But he said I'm his enemy -- he knows me. Tell him he knows me, and he can take it how he wants to take it.

"Did he play good for me? Yes, he did. Did he play hard for me? Yes, he did. He might like me. He might be sensitive of me. He might be jealous of me, I don't know why. But saying I'm his enemy, he hates me, I could care less what that [bleep] thinks. I don't give a [bleep] what he does with the rest of his life. He [bleep] with the wrong guy, and he knows that, too. He knows for a fact that he [bleep] with the wrong people."

Now the mouthy catcher has a mouthy manager. I'll set aside all the personal rancor for the time being, and even the strategic value (or lack thereof) of character assassination of players in your division, but why the [bleep] did [bleep]ing race come into [bleep]ing play? April 15th was Jackie Robinson day. The aniversary of King's assassination was less than a month ago. If these two men want to sling mud, great; if they want to manipulate the media and sent insults back and forth, fine; if they want to step outside, I'll referee the damn bout myself. Just honestly, can't we hate someone for who he actually is, without bringing his race (or nationality) into the picture?

It's reasons like this that makes virtually everyone outside of the South side root against the White Sox. Some days it's no surprise that the White Sox are the only team to ever try to throw the World Series. Somehow The White Sox always wind up with a black eye.

Notes and Notions: April 19th

Last night was a full slate with two nationally televised games and one local (the Twins). While watching the games, I came to come conclusions.

• Great American Ball Park is a hitters park. Really, really a hitters park. Part of the 6 homeruns and monster doubles were due to the fact that the starters did not have their best stuff (more on this later), but the ball was rocketing around that field


• Jerry Hairston Jr. is fast. Really, really fast. He stole a third for the Cubs and his speed was astonishing. With Hairston and Patterson at the top of the order, the Cubs may have a real speed threat. This leads me to my next note as well ...


• Dusty Baker makes strange lineups. Really, really streange lineups. I should be used to it by now, after watching some of the incomprehensible moves he made with the Giants (eg, hitting JT Snow third in the lineup). For example, here's the starting lineup for the Cubs against the Reds last night (although I am keeping in mind that Nomar is sitting):
  
  
  
  • Jerry Hairston Jr.
    
  • Neifi Perez
    
  • Corey Patterson
    
  • Aramis Ramirez
    
  • Jeromy Burnitz
    
  • Derrek Lee
    
  • Todd Hollandsworth
    
  • Michael Barrett
    
  • Kerry Wood
    
  
  You can call me crazy, but here's how I'd hit these guys:
  
  
  
  • Jerry Hairston Jr.
    
  • Corey Patterson
    
  • Aramis Ramirez
    
  • Derrek Lee
    
  • Jeromy Burnitz
    
  • Todd Hollandsworth
    
  • Neifi Perez
    
  • Michael Barrett
    
  • Kerry Wood
    
  
  Top load the speed, get to the power earlier in the lineup, and leave the strikeout prone Burnitz later in the lineup. Neifi and Hollandsworth hit for average better than power, so you keep them around to get on base late in the lineup. Furthermore, it is ludicrous to hit Corey Patterson in the third spot in the lineup. It would be like using Kenny Lofton or Rickey Henderson in the same slot.
  


• This is more of a cosmetic concern, but it really got to me. I was watching the Twins on FSN North, and while flipping back to ESPN and TBS, something felt wrong about the game. I realized that the normal camera angle used to film was off center. I tried to figure out why this was the case for about three innings, especially because neither of the other games showed the same incongruity. Then, suddenly, it hit me. It was framed the way it was so the the entire advertisement behind homeplate could be read. It was poor planning by the ballpark to set up the camera wells and the ads where they did, and I realize this is mainly a superficial quibble, but the pitcher was at least 10 to 20 percent right of where he should of been. This was a bit depressing, that the ads have become more important to the broadcast than the game.


• George Steinbrenner is a big crybaby. The Yankees make it impossible to win 162 games this year, and he throws a hissy fit in the New York media. This man has the most obvious inferiority complex in the Western Hemisphere.


• The Braves announcers are an improvement over past seasons. That being said, they are still some of the worst on television, which is amazing considering they are nationally televised. They also need better topics to discuss. Last night they were commenting on the mowing patterns at Minute Maid Field. On a slightly realted note, the WGN announcers for the Cubs this year are also better. Not less critical, but smarter and more interesting.


• The Twins are really counting on youth this year. They are hitting rookie Jason Bartlett second in the lineup (at least they did last night against their division rivals the White Sox) and "super-rookie" Joe Mauer third. That's a serious vote of confidence in these kids (I can say kids because Mauer is younger than I am, if only by a nine days).


• There was a bizarre play in the Cubs / Reds game. With the bases loaded and none out, there was a hard chopper to third. Ramirez gloved it, used his momentum to cross third and threw a perfect strike to Barrett to turn two and cut down the run. Barrett then fired wide back to third, which apparently allowed the runner from second to score. Unfortunately for him, he was already out (the force at third). However, this mistake set up second and third with two outs and eventually led to the Reds taking a two run lead (which Graves nearly blew).


• Finally, something is really wrong with Kerry Wood. In 12 innings on the year he has an ERA of 5.84, seven walks and no wins. His control is the problem, and unlike his iron horse days, he seems to be fatiguing early in games, in the fifth or sixth. At least Prior has looked good, which would give the Cubs three solid to great starters. They need to figure out something with that bullpen, though.


• A bit of a postscript. Clemens threw seven scoreless, but Hudson matched him pitch for pitch, and took it through the ninth before he was lifted for a pinch hitter. They were both on fire tonight.

It was a great night for baseball. This writer is looking forward to the opener for the St. Paul Saints, when I can sit outside and enjoy some baseball. Thankfully, they have Summit on tap at the Saints. The beer, at least, is big league.

The Good Old Days?

Everyone talked about the new Braves rotation all winter, and mostly they asked questions. Could John Smoltz handle the strain of throwing 200 plus innings? How would Hudson (or any of the Big Three for that matter) perform on his own? How many times could Mike Hampton homer off Mets and Nationals pitching? Can anyone even remember who the hell else starts for the Braves? (John Thomson and Horacio Ramirez, by the way)

The one the puzzled me the most was taking Smoltz from a role in which he had been dominant and putting him into a position where there is enormous potential for risk, both for the team and for his health. It was clear when the Braves acquired Danny Kolb that they were going forward with this gambit. Like a lot of other people, I felt that Kolb was suspect, and that his microscopic strikeout numbers would catch up with him eventually. Gammons was convinced that his numbers from 2003 showed that he had the potential to be a dominant closer who gets key strikeouts, but his numbers have fluctuated wildly throughout his career. In 2001 and 2003 his K/9 were 8.80 and 8.49, but he threw only fifteen innings in '01. 2003 was a great season for Kolb, with an ERA less than two, but that may be what the old folks call a "career year." So far this year, his performance has been disturbing.

You can get away with allowing hitters to put balls in play in order to get outs as long as you don't give up baserunners, and in only five innings this year he's given up six walks and five hits. Right now OBA is .500, and the OPS of hitters against him is 1.247. To give that number some perspective, in 2003, Barry Bonds' season OPS was 1.278, and the AL MVP last year (Guerrero) only had an OPS of .989. it is very early to speculate, but there are signs everywhere. His pitches per inning is up almost three from last year, and his pitches per AB is up one and a half.

I watched most of the Sunday Night game last night on ESPN, and saw all of the 10th inning heroics by the Phillies. But that's not really an accurate description of what happened. What I actually saw was the complete meltdown of Dan Kolb. He proved unable to find the strikezone, and walked the eighth and ninth men in the batting order. Kenny Lofton came up with no one out and tried to bunt towards the third baseman. Kolb pounced on the ball and had more than enough time to cut down the man at third, and possibly to even turn two. However, Kolb threw the ball three feet wide of Larry Jones (Chipper for those of you who are so inclined) and into the outfield, allowing the tying run to score. Next up was Jimmy Rollins, who had the most brilliant bunt I've ever seen, a high bouncer off the dirt in front of home plate that died in the grass, eliminating any possibility of a play. I don't fault Kolb for not being able to field it, as it would have been almost impossible to play. Bobby Cox brought in Kevin Gryboski, who promptly gave up a game winning single to Placido Polanco, a rocket shot that was past Larry (Chipper) Jones before he even had a chance to react.

It was nice to see the Phillies play with some heart, after the dismal seasons they've had over the last few years. Really, though, this seems to me to be an example of a rare misstep by the Braves as an organization. I think that the closer position has been ridiculously overpaid in the last few years, and is held in much higher regard than it should be. This article from The Hardball Times gets to the heart of some of my feelings on the modern, ninth inning, no men on closer. Still, it is a position of great import and was a missing ingredient for the Giants last year that no doubt cost them a playoff spot (and to all you Dodger's fans, if they'd picked up even 3 of their 11 blown saves last season, they'd have won the division). We'll still have to wait and see how Kolb recovers, but for now, the Braves are probably wishing for the good old days when their man in the ninth was the only man left from 1991, and their first NL East Divisional title. It looks like a good week's worth of games on ESPN this week, starting with the Reds at the Cubs tonight. Play ball!

Week 2 Questions

Well, the season is officially underway and this writer couldn't be happier. Less than ten games into the season, about half the commentators and sportswriters already look foolish in their predictions, which is fine, because in a month the other half will look just as wrong. There is a reason baseball was called the best conversation topic ever invented. However, some specific questions come to mind.

1) Is there an opening day jinx?

Zito, Smoltz, Vasquez, Wells and Radke, had attrocious to poor outings, Zambrano was lifted early in a game (for walking in a run, slightly more forgivable than Wells balking in a run) where the Cubs offense (for a change) spotted him a glut of runs. Plenty of starters had fine days to open the season, and there is a reasonable explanation (for the most part) for all of these starts. Zito is coping with the pressure of leading the A's and still has either problems with his mechanics or psychology. Smoltz had not started regularly since 1999, Vasquez has had all sorts of problems throughout his career, and Wells may simply be getting old. Beer and brats eventually catch up to a man. Radke is harder to explain, but even solid pitchers lose 4 to 8 games a season. And Zambrano still has problems with control, especially when he is excited. I still found it odd how many starters were shelled on opening day.

2 & 3) Are the White Sox this good / Are the Cubs this bad?

The Sox are on top in the Central and would have swept the Twins if they hadn't ran into Johan the Barbarian. Quite simply, at this point, the White Sox are doing the one thing right so far that they've managed to fail at almost every other season. They are pitching competently as a staff. They've always had sluggers, but thus far a solid rotation and a better closer in Takatsu has helped them to look like a team that knows how to win games. Every other year, they've look like a team that found a way to lose them. Takatsu did have one bad game, but in three other chances he has yet to surrender a hit (or even a baserunner). The answer here, is a frightening maybe, and if the Twins lose Silva for the season, there could be baseball in October on the South Side for the first time since 2000.

The Cubs are sputtering along near the bottom of the Central. It has been almost impossible to diagnose this team the last few years. Thier biggest challenge now it to transition from a homerun offense anchored by Alou and Sosa to a hit-and-run singles-and-doubles machine. Whether Dusty Baker will help the team in this regard remains to be seen, but after presiding over the Giants for so many years,(a team anchored by Barry Bonds) his history suggests no. If the Cubs can accomplish this, (which makes the Sosa for Hairston trade make some sense) then their pitching should be able to turn them into a dangerous team. Burnitz may be the key, and if his strikeouts are as high as in previous years (110 to 150 fo a full season), it may be a long summer in Wrigleyville. He alerady has 9 in 32 AB, which is on par with his career rate of a SO every 4 ABs. The X-factors for the Cubs is are Prior and Wood. If they are as healthy as the Cubs would have us believe, they could be great. They do desperately need a new arm (or two or three) in the pen if they want to compete with the other top teams. The Cubs are better than their record, with Wood and Prior. Without them, this looks about right.

(Side note: what is most troubling about the Cubs is how they've won, and lost. the opening day blowout, came from the revamped D'backs, and then they took two from the Berwers. However, the loss that came in their home opener, with a lead in the ninth could become common place if Hawkins continues to struggle. The 1-0 loss to the Padre's may also be a sign of things to come.)

4) What the hell happened to Sammy Sosa?

The other man in the fabled chase for 61, who brought baseball back from the dead after the strike. The Dominican Daddy. The man who, for so long, seemed to bring a rare joy to the game, has six total bases for the season, five hits, no RBI or HR, an AVG of .200 and an SLG of .240. Worst of all, this move was supposed to revitalize him. How could anyone could hit that poorly in a lineup that includes Melvin Mora (who, despite hitting only .115, has at least 1 RBI), Miguel Tejada, Javy Lopez and Rafael Palmeiro is beyond me. His plate discipline has always been lacking, and it may be that pitchers have finally figured out how to sit him down. Sosa used to be the most dependable power hitter in the majors(10 straight seasons with 35+ HR, and 5 straight with 49+), and now he just looks old and tired. He's said he'll retire at 40, no matter what, so maybe he is. Maybe he only has so many hops.

5) The AL East ????

Toronto leads the division by two games over New York and Boston and one and a half over Tampa Bay and Baltimore. How did this happen? Firstly, Toronto looks good, pounded the A's last night, and took two of three from both the Rays and Red Sox. The O's took two from the Yankees, and dropped two to Oakland to even up, and the Rays won two against the A's and one against Toronto. The Yankees and Red Sox have been too busy worrying about each other to worry about teams like Toronto and Baltimore. Furthermore, like the red last year, this lead won't last long for the Blue Jays. $120 million plus payrolls eventually take their toll.

So there you have it, the first official Friendly Confines article of the season. Get out and watch some games. We've all been waiting for this.

AL West: Battle Royale

Here they come, the annual predictions from the Confines staff. I'll start it off with what may be the toughest division to predict. This may turn from the three-way brawl it was last year into a four-way dogfight. But it could just as likely turn into a two-team slugfest. Only one way to find out.

Texas Rangers: 89-73, 3 games back

Without a doubt (besides the complete collapse of the Phillies) the biggest surprise of the season was the Rangers. Previously the whipping boy of the west, Texas had a strong showing late in the season and was legitimately considered a contender for the pennant until the last week of the season.

Clearly, they relied on their offense, scoring the most runs (860) of any team in the division, achieved through a team slugging of .457. Barring injury, the Rangers should be able to run the same lineup out on the field this year, and injury shouldn't be a problem as only one player in their starting lineup is 30 or older, and the average age of their lineup is less than 27.

Where Texas has issues is with their pitching. Only Rodgers and Ryan Drese had more than 10 wins, and they were the only two Texas starters with winning records. While Chan Ho Park could pull himself back together, he's been a mess since he went to Texas, and while R.A. Dickey threw some good games, this is not a staff that is going to see a drastic improvement. The staff was rescued by the bullpen. The relievers who threw the most innings for Texas last year all logged sub 4 ERA's and three were sub 3. To give you an idea of how important this was for the Rangers, the team ERA 4.53.

The Rangers were fourth in the AL for runs scored last year, five back of the White Sox and trailing only the Yankees and Boston. There will probably not be a lot of improvement in the hitting, but there is no reason to think that they will decline. With the departure of Hudson and Mulder, however, and the development that young hitters go through, the team could conceivably hit better than last year. It also bodes well for Texas that they didn't burn out the young bullpen arms that carried them last year.

Prediction:

This is a team that is one or two quality starting pitchers from genuine contention in the playoffs, not just for the West. As long as the organization is smart enough to hold onto Soriano and the corps of young hitters they have, and to let their pitchers develop, they could be a real force in a few years, with a couple of smart signings.

85-77, 7 games back, 3rd place finish.
They'll be close in June and July, but their pitching will start to fall apart down the stretch.


Seattle Mariners: 63-99, 29 games back

The Mariners were a joke last year, with the worst offense in the AL, and fourth worst in baseball. They've reloaded their offense with Sexon and Beltre are hoping to get back into contention for a division they used to dominate.

It's hard to come up with any real strengths this team has. Sure, Sexson and Beltre add some pop from the corners and will send little Ichiro scampering around the bases, but there are still huge holes and huge risks. Betlre had a season that resurrected his career, but hitters who switch leagues sometimes lose their stroke, and Beltre does not seem to be the most together player, even with the rest of the Dodgers as a contrast. He'd never hit higher than .290, never hit more than 23 HR, never slugged higher than .475 until last year. He has no pedigree, and is a huge risk, especially in a new market and a new league.

Sexson is a risk for other reasons. His numbers were great, until last year when he was hurt. Still, Sexson has never played on a team that has been anywhere near winning anything for about a decade. He has been used to being a show more than a star. The only reason to go see the Brewers in the 90's was to see Sexson.

Sele will help out a beleagured staff. If (big if) he can put together the type of 18-9 season that he once did, and can manage to eat some innings he could be a nice pick-up. However last year, he only threw about 5 or 6 innings a start, which is a recipe for disaster for Seattle. Full seasons from Madritsch and Pineiro could help, but this is a team full of 'ifs' right now. Guardado was the only competent pitcher in the pen and was the only pitcher on the staff with an ERA below 3. That is saying something.

Now, while I've made the Mariners out to be a gang of lepers and club-footed mountain men, there is hope this year that was nowhere to be found. Everyone is glad to get out of Arizona, and Sexson is likely no exception. If he stays healthy, he may be thrilled to be playing for a team that could win three to four times as many games as his team won last year. That sound like motivation to me. Also, with Beltre, he might do better in a smaller market, out of the LA limelight, in a town where an 80 to 90 win season would be met with a parade.

Still, this is a team with more holes than pieces. If Beltre, Sexson, Ichiro and the rest of the lineup hit like they're capable of, and the starting staff puts good innings together, this is a team that could stay in the hunt.

Prediction:

They'll never get back to 116, but they don't have to. Seattle would be happy with a winning season, which they will have, barely.

83-81, 9 games back, 4th place finish.
Close in the early summer, in the pack with Texas.


Oakland Athletics: 91-71, one game back

Even though they haven't won a World Series since 1989 the A's are the closest thing to a dynasty that the West has. Since Beane has introduced the new Sabermetric logic the A's have the most wins for the least dollars. From 2001 to 2003 they had two less wins than the Yankees and one less than the Mariners (helped a ton by the 116 season) for a third and a half of the payroll, respectively. Beane now has made the most controversial decisions of his career, trading away Hudson and Mulder to reload with young talent and avoid losing them to free agency.

Predicting how the rotation will respond to the loss of Hudson and Mulder is near impossible. Zito has fallen off his 2002 numbers (23-5, 2.75) drastically, but this was his only season with an ERA over 3.5 and a SLG over .350. Anyone who watched him this season could see that his problems were more with his head than his mechanics. Harden improved from last year and is beginning to turn into the pitcher that Beane hoped he would. The trades picked up the bullpen help that the A's needed to get back to the sort of numbers they put up in 2003.

The offense is a bit easier to predict. Kendall is an incredible pickup, a good defensive catcher who has experience with young arms who hits for great average. The Giants picked up a catcher with the same defensive skills whose career average is 67 points lower. Crosby's power numbers were promising, and several highly touted prospects are going to hit the majors with the A's this year, including Swisher of Moneyball fame. Durazo's numbers finally have climbed back up to how he played his rookie year, with a healthy bounce in HR and RBI. With a chance to DH, he has stayed healthy and his swing has returned. It's now very easy to imagine why Beane wanted to trade for him for so long. If the Lion of Alameda County (Chavez) stays healthy and one or two of the prospects really produce, the A's will have a daunting lineup. (Oh, and as a side note, Chavez's one weakness, his inability to hit left-handed pitching, seems to have disappeared this past season. He actually hit lefties better, .306 vs .257.)

Prediction:

One thing is for sure, that the bullpen will not be as overworked or understaffed as it was last year. If the young players come together, the A's could run away with the division. Likely, a few will develop, and a few will lag and the A's will be breathing down the necks of the West Coast Yankees rising, the Angels.

91-71, 1 game back, 2nd place finish.
I see it ending exactly the way it did this year, with the pitching giving out in late September. But, just wait ‘til next year. If the AL West has any sense, they will be very afraid of the A's, they could be great now, and they will be great later.


Anaheim Angels: 92-80, AL West champions

Amazing that this team is able to win they way they do, considering the fact that they're more concerned with how their name affects their marketing money than actual baseball. They only lag Boston and the Yankees in payroll. Want a new understanding of economics? In baseball, one win is worth $42,083,694(the difference between the A's and Angels' payrolls).

Colon did win 18 games, but his ERA was above 5. Sele was over 5 too, and Washburn and Lackey were both north of 4.6. Their best ERA from a starter was 3.93 from Kelvim Escobar. Much like Texas, they were bailed out by their pen and their slugging offense. Losing Guillen, even with the acquisition of Finley hurts the Angels, and very few 40 year-old players hold up as well as Barry Bonds. Furthermore, given his historically low RBI numbers(65 a year), Cabrera is more of a gamble than a sure producer.

Byrd could come around, but he's been injury-ridden for a few years and has not looked dominant since he left KC. If he is healthy, though, he could save the pen some innings. The rest of the staff, as I said before, middling. The Angels are also banking that Francsico Rodriguez will turn into the next Eric Gagne. When you get down to it, they have almost as many question marks as any other team in the division.

92-70, AL West champions.
Again, in a very tight race, the Angels edge out the A's in the last weeks, if Gurerro and the offense keep firing. Remember, it took an incredible performance from Vlad last year just to get close enough to have a chance to beat Oakland in the last three games of the year. The Angels have a tenuous hold on the division at best.

Well, in five months, we'll see how wrong I've been. I'll finish off the West next week when we'll answer the burning questions, can the Giants win with four outfielders and JT Snow covering the entire right side alone? Will The Dodgers change their name to the Orange County Dodgers to cash in on the popular FOX series. Will the Padres convert legions of fans to fill Petco Field? And will anyone ever care about the Rockies or Diamondbacks again? Stay tuned sports fans.

The Icing on the Cake

Here in Minnesota there is still snow. There may well still be snow the first day of the season. It has happened before. But in Florida and Arizona there is plenty of sun and Spring training is only days away. As a matter of fact, this may be one of the best spring trainings in recent history, not because of all the interesting (and puzzling) moves in the offseason, not because of the steroid spectre hanging over players, and not even to see who will win the annual Coconut Shrimp-eating contest (Livan Hernandez is the favorite at 5:2, but C.C. Sabathia is good money at 1:4 and Prince Fielder is a steal at 1:20).
Not, loyal baseball fans, the reason that this spring will be so great is that, for once, there will be no damn hockey. Free at last, free at last, thank Lord Almighty, free at last. Now if only the NBA could go on strike as well, then ESPN would have nothing to report but college sports and preseason baseball. Think about it. Sunday Night Baseball will not be preempted for NHL playoffs. Not once. Not even for the Stanley Cup. We will finally be able to see all those early season games that let us see how a team is taking shape. The Blue Jays might actually draw a crowd. I know Canadians love their hockey, but the Jays could win them over, if they manage to win a game or two, or sell beer.
There are a million other reasons this season will be fantastic, but for now I'm just thrilled that I won't have to watch a single second of hockey for six months. For that, I'll take all the Jose Canseco's, all the Barry Melrose commentary, hell, all the Joe Buck commentary, in the world.

Stay tuned, predictions, analysis and opinionated articles to follow. Spring Training has begun for the Friendly Confines three man rotation.

Come right out and meet the Mets

Nothing is official , but I suppose no trade is truly official until after Billy Beane is asked if he wants to be included. Nothing has been signed, although I have no doubt that the Mets sent a couple of six pack of Mont Blancs. Nothing at this point is definite, but there is a good chance that come April, Pedro will be throwing the opener at Shea with Sammy behind him in right.

Admittedly, the Mets were 26th in the league in runs scored and 28th in hits. However, over this same period, they were pathetic in several other statistical categories, including fifth in strikeouts (in their lineup), 19th in walks, and 28th in OBP. Truthfully, it's hard to know where to start if you're the Mets. They rank 28th in fielding percentage, but eighth in ERA. They were 26th in strikeouts (by their pitching staff), fifth in walks given up, and 27th in saves. Just to toss in one more stat, the Mets were 15th (dead middle of the league) in homeruns hit.

This is not a problem with an easy solution. The easiest part is identifying what does not need to be done. I see only one thing. The Mets need not take any drastic steps to reduce staff ERA. The ERA was spread evenly across the staff, so neither starters nor relievers carried or hindered the team. One very obvious problem is that of saves. Looper was fairly consistent (29 of 34) but blown saves are scattered through the bullpen, 6 from Mike Stanton and 4 from Ricky Bottalico with five others floating around. Those fifteen blown saves in the hands of a more capable, more durable closer could have been turned easily into ten more wins, enough to move the Mets to .500. While a dominant starter is certianly an ambitious move, it may not be the most oportune one, especially when Mets pitchers are hamstrung by a defense that rivals the current EPA in both agressiveness and effectiveness. If the Mets really wanted to improve their staff, they should have found some competent, tough relievers and, most importantly, they should have held onto Scott Kazmir. At a bare minimum, his trade potential would have skyrocketed given the current state of free agent pitchers on the market. With the exceptions of Johnson and Martinez, the pitching market is composed of possible or current number two and three starters. If Kazmir would have posted a few good starts with the Mets at the end of the year after they were out of the running, he could have brough considerable compensation to the Mets. I fault the Mets in no way for signing Pedro, though, as he is a quality pitcher who is definite to give a team five more wins a season over the average starter. However, I think there are other, larger holes to fill, especially on defense and offensive consistency.

None of the offensive categories that the Mets are deficient in (R, H, K, BB, and AVG) are categories that Sosa will help substantially in. His defense is average, but does nothing to help an error prone, weak throwing outfield. He will add some spash to a team with the personality of cardboard, surly cardboard, but if he leaves Chicago with bad blood, I have the feeling that some of those feelings will carry over, and New York sports fans are the least forgiving people on the face of the Earth. It has been mentioned ad nauseam that Sosa's gentle, senstitve persona will be in conflict with the New York fans. I can see the same sort of issues with Pedro, who is extremely susceptible to his emotions. Sosa's and Redro's high maintenance personalities will be targets if the Mets underachieve, as they are alsmot certian to do.

Now, finishing this on the morning of the 14th, the Pedro trade is official and I expect Sosa's name to find its way back into the hot stove conversations by tomorrow. No matter if they win or lose, I can say something about the Mets' season this year that usually can't be said. It's going to be interesting.

The Court of Public Opinion

While in the middle of my weekly baseball reading, I came across this article on ESPN.com. It deserves to be reprinted in full. For those you you who prefer the Page 2 site itself, here is the direct link.

HOW CAN YOU BE SURE?

by Skip Bayless

From the start, it was as clear as "the clear" that the feds were only after one man. It was obvious the Bush administration wanted to slap one big, bad face on its campaign to clean up steroid abuse in sports. After all, that dartboard face belongs to the easiest target this side of Osama.

Most fans already consider Barry Bonds an arrogant jerk. Most people outside the Bay Area view him as a muscled-up monster wielding a war club. THG, the name of a new, undetectable steroid, might as well have stood for That Hated Godzilla.


Barry Bonds has already been convicted -- without proof.
All along, federal agents and prosecutors whispered to reporters that they had enough evidence to take down the San Francisco Giant. Stand-up-in-court evidence. Go-to-jail-for-perjury evidence that Bonds routinely received anabolic steroids supplied by indicted BALCO founder Victor Conte to Bonds' indicted trainer and friend, Greg Anderson.

So for months, reporters anticipated a BALCO trial just before the presidential election. Sure, the Bush administration would turn it into one last political baseball with which to knock some Bonds-hating voters off the fence. But the election came and went without so much as a trial date being set.

However, that didn't plug the illegal leaks to the media. Last week, the biggest bombshell was dropped by the San Francisco Chronicle, right on Bonds' head. The newspaper printed what was supposed to be his sealed testimony to the BALCO grand jury.

That's when this became as clear as shattered glass: The feds have decided their evidence will get them no farther than the court of public opinion. And in that runaway jury of an arena, Bonds quickly was convicted and sentenced to life in baseball's Hall of Shame.

Surely the feds knew exactly what they were doing. They tossed a match in a bone-dry forest of squawk-show hosts and fans dying to bury Bonds. Within hours, most people had leaped, or been yanked, to this conclusion: Bonds finally admitted he uses steroids!

Talk about a crime.

The feds knew most people wouldn't let the facts get in their way. Most people want to believe Bonds' body is chiseled in steroids. But nobody seems to have any of that case-building fuel called proof.

Understand, you're talking to a columnist who has been as publicly suspicious of Bonds' pumped-up physique as any member of the media. Since Bonds hit his record 73 home runs in 2001, I've written that it's virtually impossible to pack on 30 or so pounds of lean muscle mass in your mid-30s -- when the body's muscle-building testosterone naturally wanes -- without some help from performance-enhancing drugs. But I've always concluded that I can't know for sure because, to this day, I have not witnessed Bonds ingesting or injecting steroids and I'm not aware of a single person beyond the shady Anderson (or Bonds himself) who can provide evidence that Bonds "juiced."

But let's be as clear as a magnifying glass about exactly what Bonds told the grand jury. He did not tell them what Jason Giambi told them, according to testimony leaked to the Chronicle the day before the Bonds bombshell. Giambi admitted he had been buying and using traditional black-market steroids and human growth hormone long before he approached Bonds' trainer for tips on how to maintain the physical edge Bonds has sustained through his late 30s.

That, Giambi testified, was when Anderson recommended he use the two forms of THG. "The clear" could be taken orally. "The cream" could be rubbed into the skin like ointment.

Remember, the athletes who testified before the grand jury were granted immunity -- as long as they told the truth. They do not have immunity from perjury.

Yet Bonds told the grand jury basically the same story that his former friend Gary Sheffield did. Sheffield said he trusted Anderson because Bonds had known him since high school, when Bonds and Anderson had been teammates. Sheffield said that, after training with Bonds one offseason, he briefly used some stuff Anderson had recommended. Only later, he said, did he find out it was THG.


Bonds shouldn't be guilty just because Giambi admitted using steroids.
True or not, that's a plausible story.

Bonds said he was so run-down following the death of his father during the 2003 season that Anderson recommended a "rubbing balm." Bonds said Anderson compared it to "flaxseed oil." Bonds said it did nothing for him and that he soon stopped using it.

Again, a plausible story.

Yes, reportedly, Anderson kept records of Bond's THG use dating back to 2001. And yes, the feds leaked a phone call they taped of Anderson boasting to an unidentified acquaintance about the steroid program he had designed for Bonds. Yet an ESPN "Outside the Lines" report portrayed Anderson as little more than a small-time pusher who sold and used steroids.

It's certainly possible that Bonds is guilty only of trusting the wrong "friend." It's possible Anderson, in the taped call, was merely trying to impress a buddy with exaggerated claims that he created Barry Bonds, robo-slugger. I must admit: It is still possible that Bonds, with the all-time great genetics passed down from his father Bobby, a five-tool star, was able to turn himself into a late-30s record-breaker by taking nothing more than legal supplements and eating and training with severe discipline.

This, remember, isn't track and field. That sport long ago ruled out the "I didn't know" defense from athletes who tested positive. In international track and field, competitors are held solely responsible for what they put into their bodies. The dog cannot eat their homework.

But baseball remains in its steroid-abusing infancy. This is the first time star players have claimed they were duped into using performance-enhancers. This was a "designer" steroid that didn't require a needle and syringe. Hypothetically, if Anderson had said, "Hey, just try shooting this stuff in your butt," Bonds surely would have been more suspicious.

Bonds and Sheffield could become baseball's first cautionary tales -- and the last players given a reprieve for not finding out exactly what they were putting into their bodies.

Either way, I need proof.

I've spent enough time around Bonds to tell you he's a maddeningly elusive blend of naive and sly. There's the Bonds who was born with a Silver Slugger in his mouth, the privileged son of a star and the godson of a superstar, Willie Mays. Barry Lamar Bonds was spoiled rotten and often shielded from an outside world he was taught not to trust. He can be blindly, childishly loyal to the few in his inner circle he thinks are his friends.

But Barry Bonds, baseball player, is as wise as a serpent. He's the first hitter who has ever had the advantage over most pitchers because he knows them better than they know themselves. Because of a long-ago injury, he's still allowed to wear a hard-plastic protector on the arm exposed to the pitcher. But would he resort to, say, using a corked bat? No way. Too proud. Too good.

To using steroids? I can't be sure.

Bonds was taught by his father to despise the media. He has admitted to reporters that "you guys shouldn't believe half the stuff I tell you." But does that prove he lied when he told HBO's Bob Costas in 2002 that he "has never used" steroids?


Bonds' numbers are incredible -- but it remains to be seen whether he cheated.
Sorry, no.

Giambi didn't incriminate Bonds. No other player did, that we know. In interviews with ESPN The Magazine and ABC's "20/20," Conte ratted out sprinters Marion Jones and Tim Montgomery -- and in turn incriminated himself, much to his lawyers' shock. But Conte admitted only to supplying Anderson with THG. Conte said he had no idea if Anderson was giving it to "Barry or Gary."

Several Bay Area media members I respect -- guys who knew Bobby Bonds -- believe Barry was taught far too much respect for the game to stoop to steroids. For sure, he's the most gifted player I've seen. No hitter has ever been more disciplined or made consistently better contact while swinging with such perfect balance and mechanics at so few pitches. For me, Bonds is in a league with Michael Jordan for performing on cue. The more Bonds has been criticized, the mentally tougher he has become under pressure.

You can argue that steroids might have boosted Bonds' confidence and made his trigger a little quicker, allowing him a split-second longer to recognize a pitch. But he would have had my Hall of Fame vote before he got big.

And while it might not be probable, it's still possible Bonds jumped from 49 homers in 2000 to 73 the next season simply because he discovered the late-career wonders of nutrition, supplements and weight-training. It's also possible he has perjured himself and will go to jail.

But spring training draws nearer without anything but leaks.

Bonds will still pack The House that Barry Built -- SBC Park. A Bonds at-bat will remain the most riveting moment in sports. People who wouldn't have watched before will want to see how far those "mutant muscles" can send a ball into the bay.

And for the rest of my days, I might wonder if, just maybe, Barry Bonds was wrongly convicted in the court of public opinion.

Dear John to Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, Canseco, Sheffield, Caminiti ...

I can't bring myself to read the full reports. I knew all along that there was circumstantial evidence. I knew for years that there were accusations and allegations. I knew, for as much as I personally dislike Sheffield, there was something in his stories a few months ago. I knew that my father was probably right. Up until the last week I was able to put up barriers. I wanted to believe in him.

Unlike Aho and Brooks, I am not a Minnesota native. I didn't see the great World Series in '87 or '91. I grew up in the Bay Area, about equidistant from San Francisco and Oakland. My greatest memories are of the Bay Bridge Series, the earthquake, and the Bash Brothers. Now the first thing that comes to mind when I think of McGwire is Creatine. When I think of the madcap race he and Sosa had to 61, all I can think of is a shattered bat on a grey day at Wrigley and x-rays of Hall of Fame memorabilia. Bonds is not the first hero to fall from grace. We forgave McGwire. We forgave Sosa. But Barry may be a different story. I'm not interested, however, in speculation as to when and how fully we may or may not forgive Barry. I'm not that rational right now. I'm still thinking about his homeruns, his elbows hanging over the inside edge of the plate, the electric feeling when he came into the on deck circle. I'm still thinking about the road trip I took to Chicago just so I could see the Giants play a game, about standing the whole game because the only tickets left were standing room, and that the morning after I went to the game he hit a ball in batting practice that broke a window in a building across the street. I'm thinking about all the nights and days I went to the park to see him. But I don't know what to think of it anymore. It feels like a relationship, when someone says they've been cheating on you. All these memories you have suddenly feel out of place. You don't know what to do with them anymore.

In Aho's entry, he suggested that Bonds' fault was greater than Rose's. I disagree. Bonds may have dirtied the game, but he did so the same way that Sosa, McGwire, Canseco, and however many spitball pitchers ever existed. He did so trying to be better, stronger, faster. He erred but it was for the game. Rose bet on the game while managing. I see no worse act on could take on the game. Nothing is more dishonorable, nothing leaves a more indelible mark. Bonds tried to give himself an edge, albeit an ilicit one. Rose used the game explicitly for his own financial gain. He did not show respect to the competition. His bets led the bets of thousands of bookees and gamblers, all convinced that Rose knew something they didn't. What Rose did says more than "I'm going to win this game anyway I can, even if I cheat." What Rose did says, "I care more about making money from betting on games than winning the games themselves." I guess what I'm saying is I'd let Bonds babysit, but not Rose.

Only one act in the history of baseball was worse than what Rose did. Only the Black Socks are deeper in baseball hell than Rose. The rest of these players, I believe, are bound for purgatory. They need time to reflect on their folly, to see where they went wrong, even as they pursued what they believed was good.

To return to my earlier analogy, I think at this point in my relationship with Barry, there's only one thing left to say; It was good while it lasted.

Rocket's Red Glare

It was a fear of mine that the flash of Beltre or the flare and panache that the Big Cardinal three would cloud the eyes of the MVP voters in the NL. I was afraid they might lose sight of the fact that while the other four major candidates for the award had fantastic, even miraculous seasons, that none of them were the Most Valuable Player.

Not even close. One man in baseball changes the game like no other, and his name is Barry Bonds. The sportswriters (and my fellow bloggers) agreed with me, on the MVP. They ignored the typical numbers that define an MVP and looked at numbers in light of the BBE (Barry Bonds Era). Brooks, Aho and I extended this same sabermetric grace to CY Young candidates, (although I don't care if you evaluate Santana in conventional, unconventional, sbaermetric, bianary or roman-numeral terms, he won it ever way) and it was Randy who came out on top. Just for a point of comparison, I've also included Jason Schmidt's numbers

W L ERA IP K/9 K/BB AVG SLG
C 18 4 2.98 214.1 9.15 2.76 .217 .329
J 16 14 2.60 245.2 10.62 6.59 .197 .315
S 18 7 3.20 225.0 10.04 3.26 .202 .323

With the exception of ERA and wins, Schmidt was better than Clemens. Neither was even close to Johnson. He was a force to be reckoned with. HE THREW A PERFECT GAME. I know some of the terminology can be difficult, but I think this one is self explanatory. Randy was dominant this season, just shy of three hundred strikeouts. Clemens had 218 (Jason came in at 251). If the DBacks would have scored him just three runs a game ...

Unlike previous years, I will not argue that Jason Schmidt was robbed of a Cy Young award, even when all of his statistics were perceptibly better than Clemens, even given injury problems. After deciding to vote for Bonds, the sportswriters of this country must have turned off there brains and jumped on the star spangled bandwagon, thinking how wonderful it was that Clemens hadn't retired. I would have been much happier if he drove off into the sunset in his Steinbrenner-bought Hummer, so that Randy "Dead Eye" Johnson could have sauntered up to the conference table and got the respect he so richly deserved.

The Bud Selig of the real world

I guess this is what happens when the Yankees actually lose to the Red Sox. If it's not one evil empire, it's another.

It Begins ...

Tonight begins an epic showdown. Money, power and influence on one side, brought to bear against youth and exuberance, corporation against family, light against dark. The essence of true evil will assume human form tonight and try to strike at a warrior pure of heart who has inspired this country.

I am not speaking of the Vice Presedential debate. There is something far more important going on tonight, game one of the ALCS between the Twins and Yankees. I assume you've already figured this out by now. I am ready to see Santana rip apart the Yankees lineup. I am ready to see Keving Brown break his other hand in frustration, ready to see Torre finally get fired, to see the evil empire all come crumbling down around them. I may not be as optimistic as Brooks, but I'm on board too. This year, the Twins have the look of a contender and if Johan Santana stays Johan Santana the sky is the limit.

Walkgate

We've been talking about it for the last three seasons, originally as footnotes to the real records he was breaking. In Barry Bond's assault on the most prestigious numbers in baseball (single season and all time homeruns) he's been setting all sorts of records along the way. The one that has, at times, taken center stage, is the sheer volume of walks he generates. I think at this point it is fair to say that no hitter in the history of the game (rightly or wrongly) has been more feared. No one changes a game more than Barry Bonds. I have problems with the way he is treated, for many reasons. Firstly, I simply believe that this is not how the game should be played. Baseball is perhaps the most egalitarian (at least in the NL) game concieved and to take his at bats and turn them into the farce they've become is disgusting. Every man on the field get's his three a game, guaranteed and opposing managers have taken that away from him. Secondly, there is no one in the majors, not Vlad and his chiropractic gyrations, not Manny and his "Made-For-Slow-Mo" homers (and fielding), not Ichiro's Sixty Foot Sprint, not even the most determined looking man in baseball, Sammy Sosa, or Sheffield and his wrist-breaking waggle as impressive. For me, it's all about number 25, the most imposing force in sports, lurking in the on-deck circle, slowly striding to the plate like a gunfighter at high noon, waiting with the patience of a saint for a strike. It's the way he turns on a ball before I can even identify it with the help of the on-screen pitch speed. It's the simple grace, the effortlessness of the swing, the purest, cleanest, fastest swing in baseball. It is perfection.

Joe Morgan finally brought some sanity to this deabte. You can argue the benefit of giving a man over 200 free trips to first base, and man who in those at bats would have had less than ninety hits, likely less than eighty. You can argue the point of picking one guy on the team not to beat you. You could even forget to take your medication and pull a Jack McKeon and say that even if Ruth hit behind him you wouldn't pitch to Barry. Joe Morgan, a man for which I have tremendous respect, who I've even met, (although I don't remember it. I smudged his autograph as well) put it like this. If you tell a pitcher to walk him intentionally, you're telling him that you do not believe he can get Barry out and eventually, you are going to have to pitch to Barry Bonds. Now you've set up in the minds of everyone on the field that Barry is superhuman, that he cannot be taken down my mere mortal pitchers, and that if he doesn't hit a home run, it's because he was distracted by the things that Barry Bonds thinks about. God only knows what those are. Maybe he's wondering if he could do this with his eyes closed. The point is, this isn't good for the game, it isn't even good for the team. You need to build a team that believes it can win, no matter what. For as much as I hate them, that is how the Angels won two years ago.

And one other thing. I know that passions run high, and that everyone in a field as competitive as professional sports is going to want to win every night, but I think there's a moment when opposing managers, opposing players, even opposing pitchers stop and watch his balls go sailing into McCovey Cove. I think even they can appreciate that greatness for exactly what it is, if only for a second. But not for a second time. We all know what's coming in the next AB. 4 wide, take your base please. In the end, we'll only get to guess what might have happened if pitchers would throw to him with some consistency, or if the Giants had gotten two big bats to protect him, or if there were a limit on intentional walks. But for as hard as they make it, he's still at 701 and I don't think he's planning on stopping.