Greetings! Well, it's been nearly a month since I last updated this blog and I have been woefully negligent in keeping things up to date. I'd probably work a bit harder if I thought people were actually reading my blogs!
In any case, today is day one of my attempt to blog daily (as time permits). So, for today, I will concentrate on the Brewers and tomorrow I will concentrate on Braves updates.
I would like to say that I am impressed with the JS Online's Brewer's Blog more so than the Atlanta Journal-Constitution's "blog" that is mainly conducted by David O'Brien (although, it was fun a couple of weeks ago when Chipper Jones visited the blog...yet again, I digress). It's been actually far more easier to keep track of the daily off-season action with the Brewers than the Braves, although you do get daily spring training photos of the Braves at AJC.com.
So, on this day, the day of the last full lunar eclipse until 2010, let's see what's going on with the Crew.
Early Picks for the Central Division
Despite holding the lead for much of the season last year, not many experts are picking the Brewers to win the division. Projections have been forecast showing the Brewers to finish either second or third (some have speculated that the Astros are somehow going to contend...).
The Brewers are in "win-now" mode, which means everyone from ownership to the players are expecting to win the division. So, why the negatives?
First, there has been considerable discussion about moving Ryan Braun to left field, and there are questions about the Crew's bullpen. Baseball Prospectus considers the Cubs to be the early favorites if not for anything but the fact that they won the division last year. The Cubs have done nothing to shore up their middle infield, while the Crew actually increased their defense by moving Bill Hall to third base.
As for the bullpen question, it seems that the bullpen is going to be far stronger than last season with the Crew acquiring several pieces. David Riske, Guillermo Mota, and Salomon Torres are the major acquisitions who most people seem to forget about. These three provide several long term and specialty relief roles which makes the bullpen far more formidable than in years past. Of course, most analysts discuss the signing of Eric Gagne and much is made of his "meltdown" at the end of last season when he went from being a good closer with the Texas Rangers to horrible in a set up role with the Boston Red Sox. And let's not forget the Mitchell Report either, of which Gagne is wisely avoiding any discussion. The real problem last season was not that the bullpen was inadequate as much as the starting pitchers were not able to pitch late into games. The bottom line is that the bullpen just became tired last season, which did not bode well come August and September.
I think that the depth of the bullpen will be remarkable this season. It'll be difficult to see how it will shake out since there is certainly a battle for who will hold the top five spots in the rotation. A healthy Ben Sheets will make a huge difference on the club, and the club now has to wait and see how Yovanni Gallardo heals from his minor knee injury (he's expected to be set back about a month). This might actually work in favor for a few others who are looking for a spot in the rotation. Right now, the five spots are being fought for by Ben Sheets, Chris Capuano, Claudio Vargus, Jeff Suppan, Carlos Villanueava, Manny Parra, Dave Bush and Gallardo when he returns. Unlike last season, there is a lot of depth in starting pitching, and I hope the Crew does not entertain trading any of that depth.
Third baseman, Bill Hall (Finally)
I still do not understand why the Brewers wanted to move Bill Hall to centerfield when it was apparent in 2006 that he was an excellent infielder. But the Brewers thought that Bill Hall had the proclivity to play the position, and to his credit, he did improve quite a bit through the season. But, I firmly believe when you take a player and move him defensively into an unnatural position you put an awful lot on him and his offense tends to suffer. Bill Hall is another casualty of a team experimenting. I can't blame the Brewers though, since they are, after all, a small market team and they were merely trying to use a valuable resource. If the move worked, it would have been viewed as one of the most brilliant moves in Brewer history, but as it was, it was a bit of bust. It definitely could have been far worse, but we all knew good and well that Bill Hall should have been at third last year when Corie Koskie's recovery seemed unlikely.
Ryan Braun certainly lacked the defensive prowess needed at the position, but he showed flashes of brilliance as well. I think he would have been an able third baseman given time, but the Brewers feel that is not a luxury they can afford right now. Replacing third base with a capable glove means a very strong infield, and that also means less extended innings via free outs (errors).
Was Bill Hall happy about the move to third base? In a JSOnline article by Anthony Witrado it's pretty clear that Bill Hall was a bit surprised when Doug Melvin signed Mike Cameron to play centerfield. But, Bill Hall also stated, "My whole thing is I just want to get somewhere where I can get comfortable for the rest of my career" which suggests to me that he's very open to be the third baseman of the Brewers.
Batting Order Issues
One of the things the Brewers will have to work out this spring training is the batting order, especially with the heart of the order. The problem? Who will hit third and fourth. Last season, the combination of having Braun hitting third and Fielder cleanup was excellent, but what happens this year? Some have suggested moving Fielder to third to give him a chance to see some better pitches. I think that's a good move as well, but I also don't see how you can go wrong with either in the third hole or cleanup.
The big issue, to me, is the lead-off. And it all comes down to whether Ricky Weeks' wrist is really healthy again, because we know he can run. I liked having Corey Hart hitting leadoff last season, although he's not your prototypical leadoff hitter. He hit .295 last season and he even showed a great deal of power, which is why I'd probably think more about placing him either as number 2 or 5. Mike Cameron will probably be given a good look at leadoff, but I actually think I'd move him down lower.
As of today, here's what I'd use as a starting lineup (sans pitcher):
Rickey Weeks (2B)
JJ Hardy (SS)
Ryan Braun (LF)
Prince Fielder (1B)
Bill Hall (3B)
Corey Hart (RF)
Mike Cameron (CF)
Jason Kendall (C)
My thoughts may change given the way players perform in spring training. But having Rickey leading off makes the most sense to me and then having JJ in the number 2 hole works because he has improved so much as a hitter the last couple of seasons. I think this is a formidable lineup and capable of sending another 200+ baseballs over the fence again this season.
As for the starting rotation:
Ben Sheets
Yovanni Gallardo
Chris Capuano
Jeff Suppan
Manny Parra
I think this rotation would be strong, and I also believe Cappy can be replaced by Villanueva if he still can't return to his form. I think Cappy is due to bounce back. I also think Manny Parra wins a position or gets traded. As for Dave Bush, I'd move him in the bullpen and give him some spot starts.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Brewers Notes: January 22, 2008
Okay, now that the Packers have bowed out of the playoffs, I guess the time is at hand to start thinking about warm, sunny Arizona and spring training. By the way, pitchers and catchers report on February 16, in case you are wondering.
First order of business: pitching. The Brewers are loaded with potential starting pitching, and as such I will be very surprised if the Brewers do not unload one (if not to dump salary as much as pick up a prospect or two). Here's the pitchers with the potential to be in the starting rotation and comments about them (in no particular order):
1. Ben Sheets. Obviously, he'll be the number 1 in the rotation. He's coming off a 12-5 season (3.82 era) in 24 games. The Brewers desperately need Ben to remain injury-free. Most Brewers fans keep waiting for that season to come about in which he will be a Cy Young award candidate. More importantly, he needs to step up as the ace of a contending team.
2. Jeff Suppan. The highly coveted pitcher who was pryed away last year from the 2006 World Series champions was a bit of a disappointment for the Brew Crew faithful. While he won 12 games last season - which was the amount he won in 2006 - he also lost 12 and his ballooned 4.62 era did not exactly bode well for the Brewers. Suppan got into a lot of trouble last season, but he also ate up a lot of innings. Personally, I think I'd keep him in the starting rotation as the 4th starter.
3. Yovani Gallardo. Already given a vote of confidence by Doug Melvin and Ned Yost, Gallardo was a shining star in a depleted starting corps last season. There's no doubt that he'll improve even more going into spring training penciled in as one of the starting pitchers. I personally saw him in several games last season and was taken aback by his lively fastball and incredible breaking pitches. And, he'll only be 22 years old this season, but he pitches like he's been a veteran for several seasons.
4. Carlos Villanueva. Here's another young pitcher (25 years old) who definitely showed he belongs in the majors. Doug Melvin has already stated that Villanueva has a place in the starting rotation to lose. I thought he has some great games, but he could be a little inconsistent at times. Being part of the starting rotation, however, will make him more consistent in my opinion since he would have a defined role from the beginning of the season.
5. Chris Capuano. Chris Capuano was the unluckiest pitcher last season, and I think his injury was a bit more pervasive than he stated. In any case, as the season progressed, I kept feeling that his mechanics were really bad. If he is healthy again, Cappy could be a number 2 or 3 starter again, and the Brewers would have a formidable rotation (perhaps, in the very least, the best in the Central division). But, Cappy has not been the pitcher that we was since before the All-Star Game in 2006 and he needs to regain that composure to win a spot in the rotation. The Brewers definitely looked to unload him during the winter, probably to avoid the $3.75 million that he made in his new contract.
6. Dave Bush. Dave Bush had good games and bad games, and his 5.12 era suggests that he was an inconsistent starting pitcher. He gave 27 homeruns in 186.1 innings as well as 217 hits (amounting to an unwieldy .290 opposing batting average). In other words, when Bush was bad, he was very bad, when he was good, though, he could be exceptional. The problem is when you are on a contending team you need to be consistent. I see Bush going to the bullpen to pitch in long relief.
7. Claudio Vargas. Claudio Vargas won 11 games and had a few bad outings. Like Bush, he suffers from inconsistency, but that could be because his role on the team has not been clearly defined. It might be worth considering him for the 5th spot, but if all else fails, he should do well in long relief. But I think to get the most out of him, he needs his role defined before the season starts.
8. Manny Parra. Manny Parra seems to be a "sure thing" at some point. The question will be whether the Brewers are willing to bring a starter with little big league experience into the rotation on a club that wants to win the division this season. Parra's 25 years old and has shown some incredible stuff in the minors and was impressive in his spot starts for the Brewers last season. I think that the Brewers will more than likely keep Parra at AAA for the beginning of the season and call him up as needed, especially if the starting rotation blows up like last season.
Bloggers across the Brew Crew have been speculating quite a few things regarding the rotation. One thing I think won't happen is that Manny Parra will be dealt in a trade. He's too good. But I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see Vargas and someone else involved. I'd like to see Capuano prove to everyone that he's a bona fide number two or three starter, as well as shake that awful losing monkey off his back. I wouldn't bother speculating on what the rotation will be, because I think Doug Melvin will be working something to break the logjam somewhat. I've heard from a couple places that the Brewers are interested in Chone Figgins, which means the Brewers would have to give up some key players (probably Parra and Capuano and/or Bill Hall). I'm not sure how important Figgins would be to the Brewers as I think Hall will play well there and Ryan Braun should not be too concerned about his time in the outfield. But, who knows what is being discussed behind closed doors!
First order of business: pitching. The Brewers are loaded with potential starting pitching, and as such I will be very surprised if the Brewers do not unload one (if not to dump salary as much as pick up a prospect or two). Here's the pitchers with the potential to be in the starting rotation and comments about them (in no particular order):
1. Ben Sheets. Obviously, he'll be the number 1 in the rotation. He's coming off a 12-5 season (3.82 era) in 24 games. The Brewers desperately need Ben to remain injury-free. Most Brewers fans keep waiting for that season to come about in which he will be a Cy Young award candidate. More importantly, he needs to step up as the ace of a contending team.
2. Jeff Suppan. The highly coveted pitcher who was pryed away last year from the 2006 World Series champions was a bit of a disappointment for the Brew Crew faithful. While he won 12 games last season - which was the amount he won in 2006 - he also lost 12 and his ballooned 4.62 era did not exactly bode well for the Brewers. Suppan got into a lot of trouble last season, but he also ate up a lot of innings. Personally, I think I'd keep him in the starting rotation as the 4th starter.
3. Yovani Gallardo. Already given a vote of confidence by Doug Melvin and Ned Yost, Gallardo was a shining star in a depleted starting corps last season. There's no doubt that he'll improve even more going into spring training penciled in as one of the starting pitchers. I personally saw him in several games last season and was taken aback by his lively fastball and incredible breaking pitches. And, he'll only be 22 years old this season, but he pitches like he's been a veteran for several seasons.
4. Carlos Villanueva. Here's another young pitcher (25 years old) who definitely showed he belongs in the majors. Doug Melvin has already stated that Villanueva has a place in the starting rotation to lose. I thought he has some great games, but he could be a little inconsistent at times. Being part of the starting rotation, however, will make him more consistent in my opinion since he would have a defined role from the beginning of the season.
5. Chris Capuano. Chris Capuano was the unluckiest pitcher last season, and I think his injury was a bit more pervasive than he stated. In any case, as the season progressed, I kept feeling that his mechanics were really bad. If he is healthy again, Cappy could be a number 2 or 3 starter again, and the Brewers would have a formidable rotation (perhaps, in the very least, the best in the Central division). But, Cappy has not been the pitcher that we was since before the All-Star Game in 2006 and he needs to regain that composure to win a spot in the rotation. The Brewers definitely looked to unload him during the winter, probably to avoid the $3.75 million that he made in his new contract.
6. Dave Bush. Dave Bush had good games and bad games, and his 5.12 era suggests that he was an inconsistent starting pitcher. He gave 27 homeruns in 186.1 innings as well as 217 hits (amounting to an unwieldy .290 opposing batting average). In other words, when Bush was bad, he was very bad, when he was good, though, he could be exceptional. The problem is when you are on a contending team you need to be consistent. I see Bush going to the bullpen to pitch in long relief.
7. Claudio Vargas. Claudio Vargas won 11 games and had a few bad outings. Like Bush, he suffers from inconsistency, but that could be because his role on the team has not been clearly defined. It might be worth considering him for the 5th spot, but if all else fails, he should do well in long relief. But I think to get the most out of him, he needs his role defined before the season starts.
8. Manny Parra. Manny Parra seems to be a "sure thing" at some point. The question will be whether the Brewers are willing to bring a starter with little big league experience into the rotation on a club that wants to win the division this season. Parra's 25 years old and has shown some incredible stuff in the minors and was impressive in his spot starts for the Brewers last season. I think that the Brewers will more than likely keep Parra at AAA for the beginning of the season and call him up as needed, especially if the starting rotation blows up like last season.
Bloggers across the Brew Crew have been speculating quite a few things regarding the rotation. One thing I think won't happen is that Manny Parra will be dealt in a trade. He's too good. But I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see Vargas and someone else involved. I'd like to see Capuano prove to everyone that he's a bona fide number two or three starter, as well as shake that awful losing monkey off his back. I wouldn't bother speculating on what the rotation will be, because I think Doug Melvin will be working something to break the logjam somewhat. I've heard from a couple places that the Brewers are interested in Chone Figgins, which means the Brewers would have to give up some key players (probably Parra and Capuano and/or Bill Hall). I'm not sure how important Figgins would be to the Brewers as I think Hall will play well there and Ryan Braun should not be too concerned about his time in the outfield. But, who knows what is being discussed behind closed doors!
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Spring is coming
Winter in Wisconsin can be so harsh. After all, we are expecting subzero temperatures this weekend, just in time for the New York Giants to come to Lambeau Field to take on the Green Bay Packers in the NFC Championship game. It seems so distant, that old game of baseball, that we forget that there really is a lot of action happening.
Yet, there is always the yearning for the spring and the beginning of my life which revolves mostly around the grand old game. I completely empathize with Rogers Hornsby who once stated: "People as me what I do in the winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring."
So, for me, spring comes February 14th. That's when the Atlanta Braves' pitchers and catchers report. And for the Brewers, it's the 16th.
So, with that in mind, let's review what has happened in the last month since I last blogged about my two favorite teams.
Gagne, Kapler, and Mike Cameron
Okay, so the Brew Crew didn't get Scott Rolen (who was traded to the Blue Jays for Troy Glaus yesterday). Most of the Brew Crew faithful that I talked with were a bit dismayed that Doug Melvin went after Gabe Kapler. After all, why do you bring a player out of retirement (Kapler was managing last season in the minors)? The answer: insurance. Melvin conceded that the free agent market for corner outfielders was bleak, plus he was unwilling to move too many players because he stated that he did not want to create a hole after filling a hole. The other reason for the Kapler signing is that Kapler was always known for his outstanding defense, something that the Brewers wanted to upgrade. Yet, the question of the day was always how were the Brewers going to address the infield defense, not so much how were they going to address the outfield defense.
But alas, we finally got the big signing in Mike Cameron (who will be sitting out the first 25 games). Cameron is expected to play Center and Bill Hall will be moved to third base, with Ryan Braun moving to left field. So, the outfield should be rather sound with Braun, Cameron and Corey Hart and Gabe Gross and Kapler as capable backups. This also allows Tony Gwynn, Jr. a little more time to be seasoned for next season. And, the nice thing about the contract with Mike Cameron is that there is a club option for next season, in case things aren't working well down on the farm for a replacement next seasons in Center.
As for the Gagne signing, this could be a boost for the Brewers if Gagne is actually healthy as he states. My feeling is that the Brewers may consider Shouse in the closing role if Gagne fails...maybe even before turning the ball over to Turnbow.
I'll write more shortly on the Braves' offseason moves.
Yet, there is always the yearning for the spring and the beginning of my life which revolves mostly around the grand old game. I completely empathize with Rogers Hornsby who once stated: "People as me what I do in the winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring."
So, for me, spring comes February 14th. That's when the Atlanta Braves' pitchers and catchers report. And for the Brewers, it's the 16th.
So, with that in mind, let's review what has happened in the last month since I last blogged about my two favorite teams.
Gagne, Kapler, and Mike Cameron
Okay, so the Brew Crew didn't get Scott Rolen (who was traded to the Blue Jays for Troy Glaus yesterday). Most of the Brew Crew faithful that I talked with were a bit dismayed that Doug Melvin went after Gabe Kapler. After all, why do you bring a player out of retirement (Kapler was managing last season in the minors)? The answer: insurance. Melvin conceded that the free agent market for corner outfielders was bleak, plus he was unwilling to move too many players because he stated that he did not want to create a hole after filling a hole. The other reason for the Kapler signing is that Kapler was always known for his outstanding defense, something that the Brewers wanted to upgrade. Yet, the question of the day was always how were the Brewers going to address the infield defense, not so much how were they going to address the outfield defense.
But alas, we finally got the big signing in Mike Cameron (who will be sitting out the first 25 games). Cameron is expected to play Center and Bill Hall will be moved to third base, with Ryan Braun moving to left field. So, the outfield should be rather sound with Braun, Cameron and Corey Hart and Gabe Gross and Kapler as capable backups. This also allows Tony Gwynn, Jr. a little more time to be seasoned for next season. And, the nice thing about the contract with Mike Cameron is that there is a club option for next season, in case things aren't working well down on the farm for a replacement next seasons in Center.
As for the Gagne signing, this could be a boost for the Brewers if Gagne is actually healthy as he states. My feeling is that the Brewers may consider Shouse in the closing role if Gagne fails...maybe even before turning the ball over to Turnbow.
I'll write more shortly on the Braves' offseason moves.
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Pete Rose Chimes In...
Anytime Pete Rose chimes in you have to temper it for what it is; it's merely a call for attention to himself.
Pete Rose was certainly one of the greatest players of the game, but he broke the most important rule (at least in legacy of the game): gambling. And, he lied about it. He lied about it so much that the fickle American public began to warm up to the idea that he should be considered for the Hall of Fame. Even I was caught up in that argument for a time, convinced that he might be wronged for being excluded from the game.
Yet, Pete Rose shows his character, time and time again.
In context of history, Pete Rose seems aloof over the precedence of his actions. Let's face it, until we see Shoeless Joe Jackson being reinstated, I can't in good conscious even begin to consider Pete Rose who admitted to his actions (Shoeless Joe's actions are certainly questionable as he played extremely well in the 1919 World Series). Kennesaw Mountain Landis made it very clear: the worst thing you can do is be involved with gambling in baseball. Players and managers are always aware of this. As an aside, if you have a chance to read the book Eight Men Out (1963) by Eliot Asinof, you should. It's far better than the movie for which the book was based. Today, in each clubhouse, there is a notice posted to remind players that there is no gambling. In other words, baseball is not forgiving of anything which tarnishes the integrity of the game.
Pete Rose, in an interview with Dennis Miller, is attempting to whitewash his actions in context of the contemporary. He notes that players using performance enhancing drugs are "making a mockery" of baseball and of course he spins this whole episode right back to himself: "I never thought anybody would make me look like an altar boy." And, I love this quote: "If you're going to put these guys that supposedly did steroid into the Hall of Fame, I mean I've got to get a shot somewhere."
So here we have classic Pete Rose, positioning himself once again as an angel. We also see the narcissism that ultimately plagues this guy's character. He has no idea where he fits in with the history of the game nor where he fits in with the issue at hand. The old adage "Two wrongs don't make a right" is quite fitting here. I suggest that every fan needs to consider this carefully before they jump on the "let's forgive Pete" bandwagon: each action that destroys the reputation of the game needs to be considered carefully within the context of history. Sorry Pete, but you goofed and you have not been contrite at all about it.
Gambling was illegal before 1919. Landis issued his ruling with that in mind. Steroids and HGH were not illegal throughout all of the time frame that the Mitchell Report examined. Baseball had a precedent regarding gambling well before Pete Rose decided to gamble on his team that he was managing and every player understands what gambling does to the integrity of the game. Players using HGH to recover from an injury or being persuaded to use it because a trainer suggests it will help recover from an injury is far more forgiving. Andro was not illegal until 2004. The bottom line: Pete Rose is no altar boy, even in context of today's steroid era.
I readily admit Pete Rose was a phenomenonal player, but he committed an egregious act in baseball. He does not deserve reinstatement - and that is what he is trying to position himself for in this interview - nor should anyone even feel sorry for this guy. Pete Rose understands that reinstatement opens the door to money.
The main reason I do not feel sorry for Pete Rose is his lack of contrition. And I understand baseball history. I tell you what, Pete, if you successfully lobby for the reinstatement of Shoeless Joe Jackson and Buck Weaver, I'll be happy to reconsider my position. Until then, you'll just have to live on as a statistical legend who will not be enshrined in the hallow Hall of Fame.
Pete Rose was certainly one of the greatest players of the game, but he broke the most important rule (at least in legacy of the game): gambling. And, he lied about it. He lied about it so much that the fickle American public began to warm up to the idea that he should be considered for the Hall of Fame. Even I was caught up in that argument for a time, convinced that he might be wronged for being excluded from the game.
Yet, Pete Rose shows his character, time and time again.
In context of history, Pete Rose seems aloof over the precedence of his actions. Let's face it, until we see Shoeless Joe Jackson being reinstated, I can't in good conscious even begin to consider Pete Rose who admitted to his actions (Shoeless Joe's actions are certainly questionable as he played extremely well in the 1919 World Series). Kennesaw Mountain Landis made it very clear: the worst thing you can do is be involved with gambling in baseball. Players and managers are always aware of this. As an aside, if you have a chance to read the book Eight Men Out (1963) by Eliot Asinof, you should. It's far better than the movie for which the book was based. Today, in each clubhouse, there is a notice posted to remind players that there is no gambling. In other words, baseball is not forgiving of anything which tarnishes the integrity of the game.
Pete Rose, in an interview with Dennis Miller, is attempting to whitewash his actions in context of the contemporary. He notes that players using performance enhancing drugs are "making a mockery" of baseball and of course he spins this whole episode right back to himself: "I never thought anybody would make me look like an altar boy." And, I love this quote: "If you're going to put these guys that supposedly did steroid into the Hall of Fame, I mean I've got to get a shot somewhere."
So here we have classic Pete Rose, positioning himself once again as an angel. We also see the narcissism that ultimately plagues this guy's character. He has no idea where he fits in with the history of the game nor where he fits in with the issue at hand. The old adage "Two wrongs don't make a right" is quite fitting here. I suggest that every fan needs to consider this carefully before they jump on the "let's forgive Pete" bandwagon: each action that destroys the reputation of the game needs to be considered carefully within the context of history. Sorry Pete, but you goofed and you have not been contrite at all about it.
Gambling was illegal before 1919. Landis issued his ruling with that in mind. Steroids and HGH were not illegal throughout all of the time frame that the Mitchell Report examined. Baseball had a precedent regarding gambling well before Pete Rose decided to gamble on his team that he was managing and every player understands what gambling does to the integrity of the game. Players using HGH to recover from an injury or being persuaded to use it because a trainer suggests it will help recover from an injury is far more forgiving. Andro was not illegal until 2004. The bottom line: Pete Rose is no altar boy, even in context of today's steroid era.
I readily admit Pete Rose was a phenomenonal player, but he committed an egregious act in baseball. He does not deserve reinstatement - and that is what he is trying to position himself for in this interview - nor should anyone even feel sorry for this guy. Pete Rose understands that reinstatement opens the door to money.
The main reason I do not feel sorry for Pete Rose is his lack of contrition. And I understand baseball history. I tell you what, Pete, if you successfully lobby for the reinstatement of Shoeless Joe Jackson and Buck Weaver, I'll be happy to reconsider my position. Until then, you'll just have to live on as a statistical legend who will not be enshrined in the hallow Hall of Fame.
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
The Return of Javy Lopez?
As reported by both CNNSI.com and the AJC.com, former All-Star catcher and fan favorite (particularly among the females!) Javy Lopez has agreed to a minor league contract to vie for a backup role on the Atlanta Braves. The one year contract with a base of $750,000 if he makes the team is quite a bit off from the $60 million plus he's made as a starting catcher.
Javy Lopez has had an exceptional career, but last year he did not make the Colorado Rockies' team out of spring training and sat out the season. This, after having poor seasons in Baltimore and Boston. For the Braves, Javy was pretty consistent offensively. After having an off-season in 2002 when he hit a microscopic .233 with 11 homeruns and 52 RBIs in 109 games, he rebounded in 2003 with a .328 average and 43 homeruns and 109 RBIs. But Lopez left after that season and we know who came around to catch for the Braves soon after!
Lopez is not being brought in to tutor Brian McCann who has been a great all around catcher for the Braves. Lopez is not being brought in either to help sell tickets. In fact, Lopez is not guaranteed a spot on the team. He has to compete against some young studs who might overtake Javy.
On the other hand, Javy is very comfortable with Tom Glavine and John Smoltz, even though rumors abounded that Javy did not work well with Greg Maddux when the "Big Three" were pitching together there. Javy is supposed to have had private workouts with Braves bench coach Chino Cadahia since October and impressed him enough to vouch to Frank Wren.
As of now, Javy will probably have to compete against Corky Miller, J. C. Boscan, Brayan Pena, and Clint Sammons. The road won't be easy for Javy. Still, Chino told David O'Brien as reported in DOB's blog that Javy's defensive skills look even better now than they did when he left the Braves after 2003.
I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, it might be nice to see Javy regain some pride. After all, Javy was once considered one of the best offensive catchers in the game and he could play fairly well behind the plate. But we'll have to see. I always wondered what Greg Maddux had against Javy's playcalling. Bobby Cox downplayed it whenever it was asked. I seem to recall that Bobby Cox once noted that he rested Javy on the days that Maddux pitched to keep Javy fresh.
Javy Lopez has had an exceptional career, but last year he did not make the Colorado Rockies' team out of spring training and sat out the season. This, after having poor seasons in Baltimore and Boston. For the Braves, Javy was pretty consistent offensively. After having an off-season in 2002 when he hit a microscopic .233 with 11 homeruns and 52 RBIs in 109 games, he rebounded in 2003 with a .328 average and 43 homeruns and 109 RBIs. But Lopez left after that season and we know who came around to catch for the Braves soon after!
Lopez is not being brought in to tutor Brian McCann who has been a great all around catcher for the Braves. Lopez is not being brought in either to help sell tickets. In fact, Lopez is not guaranteed a spot on the team. He has to compete against some young studs who might overtake Javy.
On the other hand, Javy is very comfortable with Tom Glavine and John Smoltz, even though rumors abounded that Javy did not work well with Greg Maddux when the "Big Three" were pitching together there. Javy is supposed to have had private workouts with Braves bench coach Chino Cadahia since October and impressed him enough to vouch to Frank Wren.
As of now, Javy will probably have to compete against Corky Miller, J. C. Boscan, Brayan Pena, and Clint Sammons. The road won't be easy for Javy. Still, Chino told David O'Brien as reported in DOB's blog that Javy's defensive skills look even better now than they did when he left the Braves after 2003.
I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, it might be nice to see Javy regain some pride. After all, Javy was once considered one of the best offensive catchers in the game and he could play fairly well behind the plate. But we'll have to see. I always wondered what Greg Maddux had against Javy's playcalling. Bobby Cox downplayed it whenever it was asked. I seem to recall that Bobby Cox once noted that he rested Javy on the days that Maddux pitched to keep Javy fresh.
Monday, December 17, 2007
The Mitchell Report Aftermath
Greetings! Well, I've fallen way behind here on the many things to comment about, so I guess I will just try and catch up as best that I can in today's blog. I mean, I haven't commented on Eric Gagne's signing with the Brewers and still have not mentioned anything about Andruw Jones' signing with the Dodgers! So without any further ado...
Striker to the Line!
I've managed to read the Mitchell Report - in its entirety (yes, all 409 pages!) - and through all of the legalese and stacking of evidence I am convinced absolutely that the problem is far more pervasive than what the report notes. I am also convinced that we are all guilty here. Let me explain this first.
Let's consider something rather dramatic. Over the last decade, Major League Baseball has become an economic machine. That is only possible if fans are supporting the teams in their current incarnations. And let's face the fact that we as fans have come to expect perfection from our teams and players.
So how does this impact the players on the ground? Do you not believe for one minute that they are aware that they are in the spotlight every time that they take the field? Every move, every play, is carefully scrutinized by the fans (perhaps even more so today with the ubiquity of blogging). Players naturally are going to seek those things to satisfy the lust of the fans and to get their own piece of the pie.
And before this outcry gets way out of hand, again, let's reflect on the previous paragraph. Historically speaking, players have always sought ways to gain an edge in the game. Do you think it's natural to put vaseline or spit onto a ball to gain a drop from a pitch? Or what about the pitchers who take small pieces of sandpaper to the mound. Or the pitchers who wear extra sunscreen to rub into the ball? Or what about those extra roughed up baseballs that are left in strategic places besides walls or bullpens? Players have been using tricks for years. Sometimes they get caught, sometimes they don't.
Players have used hallucinogens, alcohol, barbiturates, and other drugs. Others have superstitious beliefs that they adamantly adhere to, rituals such as placing a half stick of gum in the back pocket and chewing on the rest throughout a game.
The question we should all be asking is why. Why do they sacrifice so much, be their credibility, their DNA, their mental well-being? The bottom line is not economics, in my opinion. Look at the Mitchell Report and you'll note players who were not superstars. You'll note several players who did not have outstanding careers. But you'll probably note that they were motivated to play the greatest game on Earth.
I have hard time taking the hard stance on these players. I probably do more for Barry Bonds because he's an anathema to the game, but then again so was Hall of Famer Ty Cobb. In contemporary terms, many of the players are not doing anything different than much of the population. Many people today are seeking fast results and fast success at their jobs. "Show me the money" is more than a quote from the movie Jerry McGuire; it's a pervasive norm among many Americans. Success at all cost; let me get the edge against the rest of the world.
Recently we've seen NFL teams admitting to resorting to videotaping sidelines of opposing teams to pick up plays (essentially akin to teams stealing signs in baseball). Most notorious was the ever powerful New England Patriots. I guess my point here is that this problem is far more deep-rooted in the American norm than many people will wish to admit. But if we all reflect on this, we will have to admit that we are all equally culpable in the aftermath of the Mitchell Report.
I think Jon Heyman of SI.com summed up a lot of how I feel in the wake of this report. In his comments regarding Roger Clemens (and ultimately the whole of the issue), Heyman stated, "Some will say who cares? I say those who played on the up-and-up deserve to know. And so do the fans, most of whom love the history of the game. Well, like or not, this stained steroid era is part of the history."
Whither Discipline?
Bud Selig's position was very odd immediately after the release of the report. Specifically, I was taken aback when Bud stated that there was nothing in the report recommendations that he disagreed with. Later, we learn that Bud is considering on a case-by-case basis whether to dole out recommendations, counter to the advice in the report.
Does disciplining these players warrant necessity? Many of these players cited in the report had conducted their behaviors before MLB became stringent on the use of performance enhancing agents. Not only that, we really don't have a "smoking gun" in any of the evidence presented. What he have mostly is evidence that players bought items and we have statements by people who said they saw, heard, and a couple of administered the items. We don't have evidence that the drugs entered the players, though. We do have a lot of circumstantial evidence suggesting that this happened, but we really are not beyond reasonable doubt that each player is guilty of anything.
Does disciplining everyone/anyone accomplish anything? Probably not, in actuality, as each player will certainly be looking over their shoulder as the next one falls. The fair thing here is to institute tighter control on the testing, as outlined in the report, and maybe use the international standards that the Olympics use. I think that the drug system that is in place is working a bit, but anyone can see that there are some issues.
I am not one at all to suggest that forgetting the past will allow us to move on from this scandalous period. After all, let us not forget that baseball has been laden with scandals in the past, the most notable was certainly the gambling era in which the Black Sox were ravished in their time back in 1919. Pete Rose paid the same price as those nine who were banned by Kennesaw Mountain Landis, and certainly anyone after this report who decides to gamble with performance enhancing agents will pay a hefty price. When something stains the game, the game tends to respond harshly. After all, this is America, and within the norms of society, rarely does one get to recover when he or she wrongs society.
Turnbow and Gagne?
Well, who would have thought that Turnbow and Gagne would be mentioned in the same vein in the Mitchell Report, particularly since Gagne was brought in to basically do the job that we were all getting ready mentally for Turnbow to do. Wow, that was a long sentence!
Turnbow was mentioned in the report because he was tested positive for androstenedione in October 2003 while he was in the Angels organization and trying out for the US Olympic team. Andro was of course most notable because Mark McGuire admitted to using it during his 1998 chase of Roger Maris' record. It should be pointed out that Derrick did not use this drug illegally; it became illegal on March 12, 2004, and it was not banned by MLB at the time. It was, however, banned by the Olympics and the World Anti-Doping Agency. Turnbow was summarily excused from the team.
As for Gagne, all we really have are shipping labels which shows Kirk Radomski sent packages to him at Dodger Stadium and his Florida home. In the report, Gagne supposedly contacted former Mets catcher Paul Lo Duca on his behalf to purchase HGH. He also supposedly later inquired Radomski via Lo Duca as to how to remove air out of a syringe.
Between 2002 and 2004, Gagne was incredible as a closer, but injuries later sidelined him until last season where he seemed to be resurgent as a the closer for the Rangers. Certainly, many people will watch carefully what happens next in his career.
So, the Brewers now have three relievers specifically named in the Mitchell Report: Turnbow, Gagne, and Mota.
Logjam in the Bullpen?
If Bud Selig does not discipline anyone as he suggested he might, the Brewers are going to have a logjam of pitchers for the end of the game (much to Ned Yost's delight, I suppose). Yet, I still found it strange that the Brewers signed Gagne, especially after what appeared to be some positioning that Turnbow was going to be the closer again.
Gagne's contract is not a bad one for both he and the Brewers. If Gagne rebounds to sensational form, then it will probably be worth the $10 million (especially if the Brewers find a path to the playoffs). If he flounders, the Brewers will only be stuck with him for one season.
The Brewers could have a formidable bullpen, a luxury they lacked last season (except, of course, when Cordero got the ball). I firmly believe that a strong bullpen makes a starting staff a lot better, and the Brewers really have the makings of a strong rotation. But it would surprise me in the least that the Brewers will carry all of these pitchers on the opening day roster. The Brewers are still looking for an answer in the outfield.
By the way, anyone else notice that Johnny Estrada was non-tendered? Basically, the Brewers got Mota for free!
Aftermath in Atlanta
There must have been a collective sigh among those in the Braves camp; no current players on the Braves' roster were named in the Mitchell Report. That does not mean that the Braves are in the clear, though.
Don't forget that suspicions arose about Gary Sheffield when he played in Atlanta. Sheffield went so far as to say he was unsure what he received from Barry Bonds, a good friend of his at the time, so he was not at fault (right?). And now David Justice's name has appeared, although his name was mentioned after his time in Atlanta (he steadfastly denies that he took HGH, though he admits to inquiring about it to help recover from an injury).
John Smoltz went on Dan Patrick's show and stated that this scandal is irreparable. As much as I admire John Smoltz, I am not sure sometimes where his head is at. In this case, I disagree. I'll bet if he played in 1919 he would have said the same regarding the Black Sox scandal (and there have been allegations that gamblers were involved in more games than that World Series, by the way). Baseball recovered, John, and it will again.
Ninth Inning...
I think I'll close out this blog for now, leaving with only a modicum of sanity. I don't know who or how many players were involved in using HGH or steroids, but it's clear that something is going on. Curt Schilling went on record noting that he had to second guess hitting another player on the butt because he was concerned that he might slap an injection site. I was pondering yesterday that we generally see players slap their gloves these days more often than pat the other on the rump for a good play like days of old. I don't know if that is exactly connected, but it does make me wonder.
I think baseball will recover. Baseball is not the only sport to have this kind of scandal (anyone remember Lyle Alzado?) nor do I suspect future scandals will miraculously be circumvented. I think the use of testable steroids will certainly be done away with, but I am not convinced that players won't find other ways to get an edge.
Think about it. Do you know how hard it is to hit a 95 mph fastball (especially one with motion)? Do you know what kind of punishment a body goes through during a 162 game season? It's a test of endurance, and if a player wishes to play throughout a season he has to mentally and physically find a way.
Because, after all, the fans demand it. We demand perfection. And we are all guilty in this.
Striker to the Line!
I've managed to read the Mitchell Report - in its entirety (yes, all 409 pages!) - and through all of the legalese and stacking of evidence I am convinced absolutely that the problem is far more pervasive than what the report notes. I am also convinced that we are all guilty here. Let me explain this first.
Let's consider something rather dramatic. Over the last decade, Major League Baseball has become an economic machine. That is only possible if fans are supporting the teams in their current incarnations. And let's face the fact that we as fans have come to expect perfection from our teams and players.
So how does this impact the players on the ground? Do you not believe for one minute that they are aware that they are in the spotlight every time that they take the field? Every move, every play, is carefully scrutinized by the fans (perhaps even more so today with the ubiquity of blogging). Players naturally are going to seek those things to satisfy the lust of the fans and to get their own piece of the pie.
And before this outcry gets way out of hand, again, let's reflect on the previous paragraph. Historically speaking, players have always sought ways to gain an edge in the game. Do you think it's natural to put vaseline or spit onto a ball to gain a drop from a pitch? Or what about the pitchers who take small pieces of sandpaper to the mound. Or the pitchers who wear extra sunscreen to rub into the ball? Or what about those extra roughed up baseballs that are left in strategic places besides walls or bullpens? Players have been using tricks for years. Sometimes they get caught, sometimes they don't.
Players have used hallucinogens, alcohol, barbiturates, and other drugs. Others have superstitious beliefs that they adamantly adhere to, rituals such as placing a half stick of gum in the back pocket and chewing on the rest throughout a game.
The question we should all be asking is why. Why do they sacrifice so much, be their credibility, their DNA, their mental well-being? The bottom line is not economics, in my opinion. Look at the Mitchell Report and you'll note players who were not superstars. You'll note several players who did not have outstanding careers. But you'll probably note that they were motivated to play the greatest game on Earth.
I have hard time taking the hard stance on these players. I probably do more for Barry Bonds because he's an anathema to the game, but then again so was Hall of Famer Ty Cobb. In contemporary terms, many of the players are not doing anything different than much of the population. Many people today are seeking fast results and fast success at their jobs. "Show me the money" is more than a quote from the movie Jerry McGuire; it's a pervasive norm among many Americans. Success at all cost; let me get the edge against the rest of the world.
Recently we've seen NFL teams admitting to resorting to videotaping sidelines of opposing teams to pick up plays (essentially akin to teams stealing signs in baseball). Most notorious was the ever powerful New England Patriots. I guess my point here is that this problem is far more deep-rooted in the American norm than many people will wish to admit. But if we all reflect on this, we will have to admit that we are all equally culpable in the aftermath of the Mitchell Report.
I think Jon Heyman of SI.com summed up a lot of how I feel in the wake of this report. In his comments regarding Roger Clemens (and ultimately the whole of the issue), Heyman stated, "Some will say who cares? I say those who played on the up-and-up deserve to know. And so do the fans, most of whom love the history of the game. Well, like or not, this stained steroid era is part of the history."
Whither Discipline?
Bud Selig's position was very odd immediately after the release of the report. Specifically, I was taken aback when Bud stated that there was nothing in the report recommendations that he disagreed with. Later, we learn that Bud is considering on a case-by-case basis whether to dole out recommendations, counter to the advice in the report.
Does disciplining these players warrant necessity? Many of these players cited in the report had conducted their behaviors before MLB became stringent on the use of performance enhancing agents. Not only that, we really don't have a "smoking gun" in any of the evidence presented. What he have mostly is evidence that players bought items and we have statements by people who said they saw, heard, and a couple of administered the items. We don't have evidence that the drugs entered the players, though. We do have a lot of circumstantial evidence suggesting that this happened, but we really are not beyond reasonable doubt that each player is guilty of anything.
Does disciplining everyone/anyone accomplish anything? Probably not, in actuality, as each player will certainly be looking over their shoulder as the next one falls. The fair thing here is to institute tighter control on the testing, as outlined in the report, and maybe use the international standards that the Olympics use. I think that the drug system that is in place is working a bit, but anyone can see that there are some issues.
I am not one at all to suggest that forgetting the past will allow us to move on from this scandalous period. After all, let us not forget that baseball has been laden with scandals in the past, the most notable was certainly the gambling era in which the Black Sox were ravished in their time back in 1919. Pete Rose paid the same price as those nine who were banned by Kennesaw Mountain Landis, and certainly anyone after this report who decides to gamble with performance enhancing agents will pay a hefty price. When something stains the game, the game tends to respond harshly. After all, this is America, and within the norms of society, rarely does one get to recover when he or she wrongs society.
Turnbow and Gagne?
Well, who would have thought that Turnbow and Gagne would be mentioned in the same vein in the Mitchell Report, particularly since Gagne was brought in to basically do the job that we were all getting ready mentally for Turnbow to do. Wow, that was a long sentence!
Turnbow was mentioned in the report because he was tested positive for androstenedione in October 2003 while he was in the Angels organization and trying out for the US Olympic team. Andro was of course most notable because Mark McGuire admitted to using it during his 1998 chase of Roger Maris' record. It should be pointed out that Derrick did not use this drug illegally; it became illegal on March 12, 2004, and it was not banned by MLB at the time. It was, however, banned by the Olympics and the World Anti-Doping Agency. Turnbow was summarily excused from the team.
As for Gagne, all we really have are shipping labels which shows Kirk Radomski sent packages to him at Dodger Stadium and his Florida home. In the report, Gagne supposedly contacted former Mets catcher Paul Lo Duca on his behalf to purchase HGH. He also supposedly later inquired Radomski via Lo Duca as to how to remove air out of a syringe.
Between 2002 and 2004, Gagne was incredible as a closer, but injuries later sidelined him until last season where he seemed to be resurgent as a the closer for the Rangers. Certainly, many people will watch carefully what happens next in his career.
So, the Brewers now have three relievers specifically named in the Mitchell Report: Turnbow, Gagne, and Mota.
Logjam in the Bullpen?
If Bud Selig does not discipline anyone as he suggested he might, the Brewers are going to have a logjam of pitchers for the end of the game (much to Ned Yost's delight, I suppose). Yet, I still found it strange that the Brewers signed Gagne, especially after what appeared to be some positioning that Turnbow was going to be the closer again.
Gagne's contract is not a bad one for both he and the Brewers. If Gagne rebounds to sensational form, then it will probably be worth the $10 million (especially if the Brewers find a path to the playoffs). If he flounders, the Brewers will only be stuck with him for one season.
The Brewers could have a formidable bullpen, a luxury they lacked last season (except, of course, when Cordero got the ball). I firmly believe that a strong bullpen makes a starting staff a lot better, and the Brewers really have the makings of a strong rotation. But it would surprise me in the least that the Brewers will carry all of these pitchers on the opening day roster. The Brewers are still looking for an answer in the outfield.
By the way, anyone else notice that Johnny Estrada was non-tendered? Basically, the Brewers got Mota for free!
Aftermath in Atlanta
There must have been a collective sigh among those in the Braves camp; no current players on the Braves' roster were named in the Mitchell Report. That does not mean that the Braves are in the clear, though.
Don't forget that suspicions arose about Gary Sheffield when he played in Atlanta. Sheffield went so far as to say he was unsure what he received from Barry Bonds, a good friend of his at the time, so he was not at fault (right?). And now David Justice's name has appeared, although his name was mentioned after his time in Atlanta (he steadfastly denies that he took HGH, though he admits to inquiring about it to help recover from an injury).
John Smoltz went on Dan Patrick's show and stated that this scandal is irreparable. As much as I admire John Smoltz, I am not sure sometimes where his head is at. In this case, I disagree. I'll bet if he played in 1919 he would have said the same regarding the Black Sox scandal (and there have been allegations that gamblers were involved in more games than that World Series, by the way). Baseball recovered, John, and it will again.
Ninth Inning...
I think I'll close out this blog for now, leaving with only a modicum of sanity. I don't know who or how many players were involved in using HGH or steroids, but it's clear that something is going on. Curt Schilling went on record noting that he had to second guess hitting another player on the butt because he was concerned that he might slap an injection site. I was pondering yesterday that we generally see players slap their gloves these days more often than pat the other on the rump for a good play like days of old. I don't know if that is exactly connected, but it does make me wonder.
I think baseball will recover. Baseball is not the only sport to have this kind of scandal (anyone remember Lyle Alzado?) nor do I suspect future scandals will miraculously be circumvented. I think the use of testable steroids will certainly be done away with, but I am not convinced that players won't find other ways to get an edge.
Think about it. Do you know how hard it is to hit a 95 mph fastball (especially one with motion)? Do you know what kind of punishment a body goes through during a 162 game season? It's a test of endurance, and if a player wishes to play throughout a season he has to mentally and physically find a way.
Because, after all, the fans demand it. We demand perfection. And we are all guilty in this.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Updated List of Players
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
