I'll be the first to admit that Cliff Lee isn't Roy Halladay, but he's a darned good pitcher and the Phillies got Lee for a lesser group of good prospects than the Blue Jays demanded.
Yes, Baseball America rated Carlos Carrasco, Lou Marson, Jason Donald and Jason Knapp as the 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 10th ranked prospects in the Phillies' organization (a few of last year's top 10 -- pitcher Josh Outman and SS Adrian Cardenas, went to Oakland in the Joe Blanton deal) going into the season. Last year, you could have argued that Carrasco was the Phillies' top pitching prospect and Donald the top position-playing prospect and won the argument. But a lot has changed in a year.
Carrasco, widely projected as a solid #3 starter with upside, lost his way at AAA Lehigh Valley this season. He's far from a suspect, but he's not the gilt-edged prospect he was a year ago. He might need a new start in the Cleveland organization, but he's a ways away from proving that he belongs in the bigs in any capacity, let alone as a high-ceiling starter. Marson is a good receiver and decent hitter, although he hasn't shown that much power. He's a major-league catcher, for sure, and the question is whether his bat can sustain him in a starter's role. Again, this season hasn't been as good as previous seasons. Donald had an amazing fall, playing among the best baseball in the Arizona Fall League. He's been hurt for part of the season at Lehigh Valley, but he has failed to build upon the stellar press clippings of a year ago. He could be a starting SS or 2B, has good power, and is a good player. Not sure if he is the next Ryne Sandberg, but you have to give up value to get it, and Donald is good. Knapp is a young kid who was on the DL at low-A Lakewood. Big kid, great fastball, potential closer, but a long way away. Bottom line: the first three aren't the sure things they were a year ago, and Knapp has a lot of upside. Decent deal for Cleveland, excellent one for the Phillies.
The Phillies got to keep starting pitcher J.A. Happ (whom I believe will be dealt for a closer before Friday afternoon, perhaps to Arizona for Chad Qualls or Baltimore for George Sherrill, for the simple reason that with Lee the Phillies have four lefty starters and six starting pitchers overall when you count Pedro Martinez), top hitting prospects Michael Taylor and Dominic Brown, and top pitching prospect Kyle Drabek. That's pretty good considering they added last year's AL Cy Young Award winner to their rotation. I still say that the bullpen is a big question mark, and that the Phillies need to make one more move to sure it up before Friday.
As for the Jays, well, they missed a golden opportunity with the team that was in the right place at the right time with the right resources. The Phillies are printing money, they can make a deep run, and they have lots of prospects. By starting with their "wish list" demand and refusing to back off, the Jays doomed themselves to failure. From a psychological standpoint, negotiation is all about give and take, and the Blue Jays failed to play into the dynamic by refusing to budge. Most people on the other side expect movement, so perhaps they should have asked for Happ, Drabek, Brown and Michael Taylor and let the Phillies counter. Perhaps they did, we don't know, but press reports suggest that they didn't. And, if they didn't, they didn't negotiate well.
Also, did they misjudge their bargaining power? Yes, they have arguably the best pitcher in the AL, but they couldn't auction him because apparently only one team (Philadelphia) was willing to come to the auction. It doesn't seem like the Angels, Rangers or Yankees were real players, and from reports on the ESPN ticker it didn't appear that the Red Sox had made an offer. If that's the case, they had much less leverage than they think. Check that -- the Phillies actually had more leverage because they were more successful in playing Toronto off against Cleveland than Toronto was in playing Philadelphia off against anyone. Because Toronto failed to see that, they're still holding onto Halladay and are likely to keep him through the end of the season. As a result, his trade value will drop.
Would it have been so bad for Toronto to have received Happ, Brown, Marson and Donald? That would have been a pretty good package. They would have gotten a #3 starter in Happ, the Phillies' top position-player prospect in Brown, a catcher in waiting in Marson and a replacement for Mario Scutaro at short (they could have sent Scutaro to the Phillies, who could have kept him and cut Eric Bruntlett, who is having a bad year). And they might have even been able to get one more prospect from lower in the minors, perhaps Knapp. Instead, it's unclear who their suitors will be in the off-season, especially if they don't want to trade within their division. And, as the clock ticks, so does Halladay's trade value diminish.
The Blue Jays misread the market for Roy Halladay and blundered big-time in the process.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Monday, July 27, 2009
Tragedy at Citizens Bank Park
Saturday afternoon two groups got into a scuffle at McFadden's, a restaurant-bar in Citizens Bank Park. According to the linked article, McFadden's ejected the group, but the fight continued.
In a nearby parking lot, costing a 22 year-old patron his life. You can read all about the tragedy here.
Citizens Bank Park is a nice place. I take my family there. It also sells out pretty regularly, and the team is rolling in the dough. The most popular vendors are those who sell beer (at about $7 a pop). And the team sells a lot of it.
That's interesting, given that many who travel to the game drive. The stadium is conveniently located for fans from South Jersey, northern Delaware and suburbs to the west, south, north and east of the city. Given the lack of traffic accidents (I'm less sure about DUI arrests), it's a good bet that many fans come with designated drivers.
But there are a few things that the Phillies can do better on the alcohol front, as follows:
1. Ban tailgating from all lots surrounding the stadium. The reason? I couldn't get into my normal lot about a month ago and ended up in the lot adjacent to Lincoln Financial Field. I was one of the last cars to get into the lot. Still, there were plenty of open spaces, but I had trouble finding a space. Tailgaters, many of whom had plenty to drink before the game began, took up multiple spaces, either sitting in folding chairs or playing games. (Why anyone would find a tailgate on asphalt in the heart of a hot city appealing is beyond me). Most wouldn't budge. Finally, I got near an open space where the tailgaters looked less challenging, and I heard one of them say to another, "Let him in, he's got a kid with him." Great, my 9 year-old, the human shield.
A friend once went to a Flyers' playoff game at nearby Wachovia Center a few years ago, the same night of a "dollar dog" night at the park that typically attracts a college-age crowd. So drunk and rowdy were the Phillies' fans after the game that they blocked traffic, stood before his car refusing to move, and otherwise were disruptive. It was an embarrassing display of behavior.
2. Stop beer sales after the fifth inning. This is an easy one. Signs abound on the highways in Pennsylvania that pronounced "Buzzed driving is drunk driving." Let's make sure that buzzed driving doesn't happen by taking away the suds after the game is half over. Why take any risks? Do the Phillies need that much extra money from post-fifth inning beer sales? I don't think so.
There are plenty of ways to have fun without either alcohol or excessive alcohol. The Phillies are a great team with a great organization, but even the best need a reality check from time to time, and the Phillies need one on this topic.
Because people who drink too much can do bad things.
In a nearby parking lot, costing a 22 year-old patron his life. You can read all about the tragedy here.
Citizens Bank Park is a nice place. I take my family there. It also sells out pretty regularly, and the team is rolling in the dough. The most popular vendors are those who sell beer (at about $7 a pop). And the team sells a lot of it.
That's interesting, given that many who travel to the game drive. The stadium is conveniently located for fans from South Jersey, northern Delaware and suburbs to the west, south, north and east of the city. Given the lack of traffic accidents (I'm less sure about DUI arrests), it's a good bet that many fans come with designated drivers.
But there are a few things that the Phillies can do better on the alcohol front, as follows:
1. Ban tailgating from all lots surrounding the stadium. The reason? I couldn't get into my normal lot about a month ago and ended up in the lot adjacent to Lincoln Financial Field. I was one of the last cars to get into the lot. Still, there were plenty of open spaces, but I had trouble finding a space. Tailgaters, many of whom had plenty to drink before the game began, took up multiple spaces, either sitting in folding chairs or playing games. (Why anyone would find a tailgate on asphalt in the heart of a hot city appealing is beyond me). Most wouldn't budge. Finally, I got near an open space where the tailgaters looked less challenging, and I heard one of them say to another, "Let him in, he's got a kid with him." Great, my 9 year-old, the human shield.
A friend once went to a Flyers' playoff game at nearby Wachovia Center a few years ago, the same night of a "dollar dog" night at the park that typically attracts a college-age crowd. So drunk and rowdy were the Phillies' fans after the game that they blocked traffic, stood before his car refusing to move, and otherwise were disruptive. It was an embarrassing display of behavior.
2. Stop beer sales after the fifth inning. This is an easy one. Signs abound on the highways in Pennsylvania that pronounced "Buzzed driving is drunk driving." Let's make sure that buzzed driving doesn't happen by taking away the suds after the game is half over. Why take any risks? Do the Phillies need that much extra money from post-fifth inning beer sales? I don't think so.
There are plenty of ways to have fun without either alcohol or excessive alcohol. The Phillies are a great team with a great organization, but even the best need a reality check from time to time, and the Phillies need one on this topic.
Because people who drink too much can do bad things.
Advice for the Phillies and Blue Jays
This report indicates that the talks between the Phillies and the Blue Jays for ace Roy Halladay aren't going well. The reasons -- the Phillies don't want to part with their top minor-league pitching prospect, Kyle Drabek, and the Jays aren't back off their initial trade request that consists of Rookie of the Year candidate J.A. Happ, Drabek and 6'5", 220-pound OF Dominic Brown, viewed as the best position-player prospect in the Phillies organization.
Let's separate the two issues, because they aren't one and the same. As to the first, well, the Phillies might have to bite the bullet and take a risk that Drabek, who has already undergone arm surgery, will turn into the next John Smoltz (traded for Doyle Alexander, who helped lead the Tigers to a division crown). As to the second, in most negotiations you don't lead with your ultimate "wish list" result. Instead, you lead with something that you'd be willing to come down from reasonably. So, for example, a reasonable negotiator experienced in the art would be well within reason to infer that if the Jays initially asked for Happ, Drabek and Brown, they'd be willing to settle for less. That doesn't mean that they'd be willing to settle for less than Drabek, but certainly less than Happ, Drabek and Brown.
So, it could be that the Phillies aren't reasonable in being unwilling to peddle Drabek. After all, you have to give up quality to get it. But that doesn't mean that the Phillies are being unreasonable. It just means that they have to figure out what "lesser than full wish list" combination of players the Jays would be willing to take. For example, what if they offered the following combination: AAA hurler Carlos Carrasco (once viewed as a middle-of-the-rotation starter), Drabek and Michael Taylor (and OF now at AAA Lehigh Valley who has had a stellar minor-league career). Or, alternatively, Carrasco, Drabek, Taylor and catcher Lou Marson (another good prospect but perhaps expendable now that Carlos Ruiz seems to have the Phillies' job for a while). That's a pretty good package, and the Phillies don't have to yield Happ. Put differently, there should be room to make a deal so long as the Phillies aren't required to yield all three of Happ, Drabek and Brown.
However, it appears to be quite unreasonable for the Jays to stick with their initial offer and not yield. They obviously haven't listened well to the Phillies or are confident that someone else might enter the fray seriously enough and make a rich enough offer to cause the Phillies to yield in this game of chicken. It's a big gamble. If they win, they're smarter than the rest of us and I'll stand corrected regarding this post. If they end up keeping Halladay, then it's a sign that they misjudged the market, will ride their ace to another fourth-place finish and either trade him before the 2010 trading deadline or fail to do so for similar reasons and end up losing him after next season (where the quid will be a supplemental first-round pick in the 30s overall and another team's first-rounder).
If the Jays are willing to move off their initial position, they can make a deal by tomorrow. I do agree, though, that the Indians' Cliff Lee won't be much cheaper (and I think that Halladay is a better bet). Lee's salary is much more attractive than Halladay's (by about $10 million), he's signed through the end of next season, and his team's GM, Mark Shapiro, pulled off one of the all-time trades 7 years ago when he dealt Bartolo Colon to Montreal for three prospects -- Lee, 2B Brandon Phillips and OF Grady Sizemore. Talk about being able to judge talent!
So here's some advice for the Phillies: see what Toronto asks for, see what Cleveland asks for, and try not to trade anyone that Cleveland asks for, knowing that despite the Indians' current state Mark Shapiro knows talent (and you don't want to be the GM in a deal that yields Lee, Sizemore and Phillips, or the current-day versions thereof). But make the deal for Halladay if you can, get a possible closer before the deadline, and then work hard to repeat -- because it's within your grasp.
And here's some advice for J.P. Ricciardi, a well-schooled GM and a bright guy: you can be the prettiest girl on the block, but you only can go to the dance with one guy. Translated, that means that you should work the phones hard and take the best offer you can, because it's like to be much better than what you'll get a year from now when you're seeking to offer Halladay for rental for the highest bidder. Halladay's value will drop because the suitors only will get him for one season's pennant race instead of that and a full season. Don't cut your nose off to spite your face -- make the best deal.
And don't posture publicly to try to bully or humiliate your trading partner, and close the leaks now. Get the deal done, and then trade your high-priced players and rebuild. That's your mission, and anything less before Friday will be a failure.
Let's separate the two issues, because they aren't one and the same. As to the first, well, the Phillies might have to bite the bullet and take a risk that Drabek, who has already undergone arm surgery, will turn into the next John Smoltz (traded for Doyle Alexander, who helped lead the Tigers to a division crown). As to the second, in most negotiations you don't lead with your ultimate "wish list" result. Instead, you lead with something that you'd be willing to come down from reasonably. So, for example, a reasonable negotiator experienced in the art would be well within reason to infer that if the Jays initially asked for Happ, Drabek and Brown, they'd be willing to settle for less. That doesn't mean that they'd be willing to settle for less than Drabek, but certainly less than Happ, Drabek and Brown.
So, it could be that the Phillies aren't reasonable in being unwilling to peddle Drabek. After all, you have to give up quality to get it. But that doesn't mean that the Phillies are being unreasonable. It just means that they have to figure out what "lesser than full wish list" combination of players the Jays would be willing to take. For example, what if they offered the following combination: AAA hurler Carlos Carrasco (once viewed as a middle-of-the-rotation starter), Drabek and Michael Taylor (and OF now at AAA Lehigh Valley who has had a stellar minor-league career). Or, alternatively, Carrasco, Drabek, Taylor and catcher Lou Marson (another good prospect but perhaps expendable now that Carlos Ruiz seems to have the Phillies' job for a while). That's a pretty good package, and the Phillies don't have to yield Happ. Put differently, there should be room to make a deal so long as the Phillies aren't required to yield all three of Happ, Drabek and Brown.
However, it appears to be quite unreasonable for the Jays to stick with their initial offer and not yield. They obviously haven't listened well to the Phillies or are confident that someone else might enter the fray seriously enough and make a rich enough offer to cause the Phillies to yield in this game of chicken. It's a big gamble. If they win, they're smarter than the rest of us and I'll stand corrected regarding this post. If they end up keeping Halladay, then it's a sign that they misjudged the market, will ride their ace to another fourth-place finish and either trade him before the 2010 trading deadline or fail to do so for similar reasons and end up losing him after next season (where the quid will be a supplemental first-round pick in the 30s overall and another team's first-rounder).
If the Jays are willing to move off their initial position, they can make a deal by tomorrow. I do agree, though, that the Indians' Cliff Lee won't be much cheaper (and I think that Halladay is a better bet). Lee's salary is much more attractive than Halladay's (by about $10 million), he's signed through the end of next season, and his team's GM, Mark Shapiro, pulled off one of the all-time trades 7 years ago when he dealt Bartolo Colon to Montreal for three prospects -- Lee, 2B Brandon Phillips and OF Grady Sizemore. Talk about being able to judge talent!
So here's some advice for the Phillies: see what Toronto asks for, see what Cleveland asks for, and try not to trade anyone that Cleveland asks for, knowing that despite the Indians' current state Mark Shapiro knows talent (and you don't want to be the GM in a deal that yields Lee, Sizemore and Phillips, or the current-day versions thereof). But make the deal for Halladay if you can, get a possible closer before the deadline, and then work hard to repeat -- because it's within your grasp.
And here's some advice for J.P. Ricciardi, a well-schooled GM and a bright guy: you can be the prettiest girl on the block, but you only can go to the dance with one guy. Translated, that means that you should work the phones hard and take the best offer you can, because it's like to be much better than what you'll get a year from now when you're seeking to offer Halladay for rental for the highest bidder. Halladay's value will drop because the suitors only will get him for one season's pennant race instead of that and a full season. Don't cut your nose off to spite your face -- make the best deal.
And don't posture publicly to try to bully or humiliate your trading partner, and close the leaks now. Get the deal done, and then trade your high-priced players and rebuild. That's your mission, and anything less before Friday will be a failure.
Mets' Fans Shouldn't Fret Too Much Because. . .
the Phillies, to a degree, are in the same boat.
A caller to New York's WFAN recently blasted Mets' executive Tony Bernazard for running the Mets' farm system into the ground. He noted that there are a bunch of old players (late 20's, even early 30's) on the Mets' AA roster. He cited that point as a sign that the Mets' farm system is in real trouble.
Well, I checked the AA and AAA rosters of the Phillies, and, truth be told, most of the guys on those rosters won't make the majors. Only a few are bona fide prospects, some might have a chance to fill in at the back of the bullpen or in a pinch-hitting role, but most are career minor-leaguers who are older than 27 and many who are about 30. It seems that this is the way of the minor leagues, so Met fans shouldn't despair at the proliferation of career minor leaguers on AA and AAA rosters. It makes sense, given that not everyone can make the majors, to have some good players at AAA and AA to provide good proving grounds for the elite prospects on their way up and a holding pattern for players who could serve as insurance policies down the stretch.
Where the Mets' fans have reason to be upset is that their farm system only has 3 top prospects according to the guys on the FAN. That's not enough, especially when compared to the nearby competition 90 miles south in Philadelphia. Still, the Phillies' fans aren't too giddy, because for many years their farm system wasn't any good. Now, it's bearing fruit, but it wasn't always that way.
Met fans also shouldn't be so hard on their team. How many teams could lose Carlos Beltran, Jose Reyes, Carlos Delgado, a good starter (John Maine) and their set-up man (J.J. Putz) and contend? The answer is none. You could have the best G.M. of all time and he couldn't heal those wounds. So, be patient, your team will revive itself, if not this year, then next.
A caller to New York's WFAN recently blasted Mets' executive Tony Bernazard for running the Mets' farm system into the ground. He noted that there are a bunch of old players (late 20's, even early 30's) on the Mets' AA roster. He cited that point as a sign that the Mets' farm system is in real trouble.
Well, I checked the AA and AAA rosters of the Phillies, and, truth be told, most of the guys on those rosters won't make the majors. Only a few are bona fide prospects, some might have a chance to fill in at the back of the bullpen or in a pinch-hitting role, but most are career minor-leaguers who are older than 27 and many who are about 30. It seems that this is the way of the minor leagues, so Met fans shouldn't despair at the proliferation of career minor leaguers on AA and AAA rosters. It makes sense, given that not everyone can make the majors, to have some good players at AAA and AA to provide good proving grounds for the elite prospects on their way up and a holding pattern for players who could serve as insurance policies down the stretch.
Where the Mets' fans have reason to be upset is that their farm system only has 3 top prospects according to the guys on the FAN. That's not enough, especially when compared to the nearby competition 90 miles south in Philadelphia. Still, the Phillies' fans aren't too giddy, because for many years their farm system wasn't any good. Now, it's bearing fruit, but it wasn't always that way.
Met fans also shouldn't be so hard on their team. How many teams could lose Carlos Beltran, Jose Reyes, Carlos Delgado, a good starter (John Maine) and their set-up man (J.J. Putz) and contend? The answer is none. You could have the best G.M. of all time and he couldn't heal those wounds. So, be patient, your team will revive itself, if not this year, then next.
Baseball TV: Doofus Alert
Every broadcast focuses upon hitters. Which means, of course, that you see fans behind home plate and near the dugout (depending on the camera angle and whether the hitter is left-handed or right-handed).
Will those who are in the field of vision stop talking on their cellphones and waving as though they were survivors of a shipwreck at the TV cameras? You look like idiots. Can you do something to preserve your dignity? Perhaps tip your hat, smile, act like you've been in those seats say ten times previously?
Because collectively you're getting to be pretty hard to take.
Unless, of course, the team you favor is mashing the ball and leading its division.
Will those who are in the field of vision stop talking on their cellphones and waving as though they were survivors of a shipwreck at the TV cameras? You look like idiots. Can you do something to preserve your dignity? Perhaps tip your hat, smile, act like you've been in those seats say ten times previously?
Because collectively you're getting to be pretty hard to take.
Unless, of course, the team you favor is mashing the ball and leading its division.
Friday, July 24, 2009
Class Act of the Day, Month and Perhaps Year
The Tampa Bay Rays gave ChiSox pitcher Mark Buehrle a standing ovation after he completed his perfect game against them.
That's a great sign of good sportsmanship.
That's a great sign of good sportsmanship.
The Phillies Are Also Scouting Closers
Interesting article by MLB.com's Todd Zolecki regarding the Phillies' hot pursuit of Roy Halladay. Zolecki reports that the Phillies are also looking at Diamondbacks' closer Chad Qualls and Orioles' closer George Sherrill.
Smart thinking. I was wondering last night about the horrible ironies the Phillies could suffer if they traded similar-caliber prospects to the Jays that the Expos did to the Indians 7 years ago when they acquired Bartolo Colon (they landed Cliff Lee, Brandon Phillips and Grady Sizemore). Zolecki's article indicates that the Jays are looking for a Colon-like exchange, or, a similar exchange that Baltimore received from Seattle for Erik Bedard. The similarities in those two deals is that the team that traded the star did much better than the team that got the star. If that's what the Jays are looking for, the trade probably won't happen.
The ironies, of course, would be a) that Halladay gets hurt and doesn't contribute, b) that the prospects turn out to be superstars, or c) that Halladay excels but with the injuries to the Phillies' bullpen and the below-par performance of Brad Lidge, the bullpen costs the Phillies the World Series. So, it makes sense to pursue Halladay and a closer -- the Phillies do need help in the bullpen.
Will they acquire Halladay? This morning's Philadelphia Inquirer reported that the Jays have asked for rookie-of-the-year candidate J.A. Happ and the Phillies' best pitching and position playing prospects -- AA pitcher Kyle Drabek and High A outfielder Dominic Brown. Is that too rich? It might be the right deal if the Phillies can ink Halladay to a 2-year contract extension, guaranteeing that he'll be in Philadelphia through the 2012 season, when he'll be 34. There's plenty of time until it's July 31, so lots can happen between now and then.
Smart thinking. I was wondering last night about the horrible ironies the Phillies could suffer if they traded similar-caliber prospects to the Jays that the Expos did to the Indians 7 years ago when they acquired Bartolo Colon (they landed Cliff Lee, Brandon Phillips and Grady Sizemore). Zolecki's article indicates that the Jays are looking for a Colon-like exchange, or, a similar exchange that Baltimore received from Seattle for Erik Bedard. The similarities in those two deals is that the team that traded the star did much better than the team that got the star. If that's what the Jays are looking for, the trade probably won't happen.
The ironies, of course, would be a) that Halladay gets hurt and doesn't contribute, b) that the prospects turn out to be superstars, or c) that Halladay excels but with the injuries to the Phillies' bullpen and the below-par performance of Brad Lidge, the bullpen costs the Phillies the World Series. So, it makes sense to pursue Halladay and a closer -- the Phillies do need help in the bullpen.
Will they acquire Halladay? This morning's Philadelphia Inquirer reported that the Jays have asked for rookie-of-the-year candidate J.A. Happ and the Phillies' best pitching and position playing prospects -- AA pitcher Kyle Drabek and High A outfielder Dominic Brown. Is that too rich? It might be the right deal if the Phillies can ink Halladay to a 2-year contract extension, guaranteeing that he'll be in Philadelphia through the 2012 season, when he'll be 34. There's plenty of time until it's July 31, so lots can happen between now and then.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Guts in Pittsburgh
Or call it chicken, but the two most-tenured Pirates, SS Jack Wilson and 2B Freddy Garcia, rejected the Pirates' offer of contract extensions and will not counter. You can read about the negotiations -- or lack thereof -- here.
The Pirates are in a difficult spot. As the article points out, they lack prospects to replace their double-play duo. They're on the verge of their 17th straight losing season. They realize that the market for all players save the Roy Halladays has droppsed, and they recognize that you can get a replacement SS on the market for far less than what Wilson is making and what they offered. Still, they made what looked to be "in the ballpark" offers, only to get rejected flat-out.
And that takes some guts. The Pirates' front office risked aggravating its fan base by making this unpopular move, but it's the sort of move that franchises have to make to be successful. Heck, the Philadelphia Eagles' Andy Reid has made this sort of move for almost a decade, and while the Eagles' fans openly disdain the discaring of players like Brian Dawkins, history has proven Reid to be a great judge of when a player's value has diminished. The record -- and the polling data -- doesn't lie. Reid is viewed as being among the top 5 coaches in the NFL, and the Eagles have been to 5 NFC championship games in the past years.
Pirate fans right now would settle for a winning season, let alone a run at the playoffs. And to get there, the Pirates' front office have to do just what they're doing -- making value-oriented moves, playing the right kids, and fortifying their pitching staff. The Pirates will again be sellers in the next 10 days, and if they can move closer Matt Capps to a contender for a few prospects and perhaps Sanchez, who swings a good bat, they'd be wise to do just that.
Rome wasn't built in a day, and it will take a few more years for the Pirates to re-position their team and make a run in the ever-takeable NL Central. Playing hardball with Wilson and Sanchez -- despite their popularity -- is a good start.
The Pirates are in a difficult spot. As the article points out, they lack prospects to replace their double-play duo. They're on the verge of their 17th straight losing season. They realize that the market for all players save the Roy Halladays has droppsed, and they recognize that you can get a replacement SS on the market for far less than what Wilson is making and what they offered. Still, they made what looked to be "in the ballpark" offers, only to get rejected flat-out.
And that takes some guts. The Pirates' front office risked aggravating its fan base by making this unpopular move, but it's the sort of move that franchises have to make to be successful. Heck, the Philadelphia Eagles' Andy Reid has made this sort of move for almost a decade, and while the Eagles' fans openly disdain the discaring of players like Brian Dawkins, history has proven Reid to be a great judge of when a player's value has diminished. The record -- and the polling data -- doesn't lie. Reid is viewed as being among the top 5 coaches in the NFL, and the Eagles have been to 5 NFC championship games in the past years.
Pirate fans right now would settle for a winning season, let alone a run at the playoffs. And to get there, the Pirates' front office have to do just what they're doing -- making value-oriented moves, playing the right kids, and fortifying their pitching staff. The Pirates will again be sellers in the next 10 days, and if they can move closer Matt Capps to a contender for a few prospects and perhaps Sanchez, who swings a good bat, they'd be wise to do just that.
Rome wasn't built in a day, and it will take a few more years for the Pirates to re-position their team and make a run in the ever-takeable NL Central. Playing hardball with Wilson and Sanchez -- despite their popularity -- is a good start.
Why the Phillies Should Trade for Roy Halladay
Before the Eagles start training camp, the huge talk in the Philadelphia sports world surround whether the Phillies should trade a bunch of prospects and perhaps a current Major Leaguer or two for the Blue Jays' Roy Halladay, the best pitcher in the American League.
There are two schools of thought.
Those opposed to the trade recoil in horror at the thought of trading the next Lou Brock for Ernie Broglio, the next Jeff Bagwell for Larry Andersen, the next John Smoltz for Doyle Alexander or the next Adam Jones and four other good prospects for Erik Bedard. They are equating the prospects subject to speculation -- pitchers Kyle Drabek and Jason Knapp and outfielders Dominic Brown and Michael Taylor -- to Halladay, Chad Billingsley, Darryl Strawberry and Darryl Strawberry (the latter two, of course, without the off-the-field problems). And, of course, no one wants to trade such a potent foursome for just one Roy Halladay. Then the talk turns to whether the Phillies should trade J.A. Happ as part of the deal. Happ is 7-0, looks to be a good middle-of-the-rotation starter, has good poise, etc. Those opposed to the trade just don't want to part with Happ.
Those supportive of the trade argue that the Phillies are really primed to win now, that most prospects don't turn out to be all-stars, that pitchers get hurt (and that Drabek already has recovered from arm surgery), that Happ hasn't beaten a team with a winning record and could be the 2009 version of Marty Bystrom, the rookie pitcher in 1980 who came up in Septemer, went 5-0 and hasn't been heard from since. They argue that you have to pay a steep price in terms of prospects because Halladay is signed through 2010 and, if the Jays were to keep him, they'd get a supplemental #1 pick and the #1 pick of the team that signs him. So, it stands to reason that if the Jays were going to trade Happ, they'd want at least 3 prime prospects, perhaps 4.
I tend to agree with the pro-trade side. Happ might not turn into Bystrom, but I'm not so sure he'll turn into Warren Spahn, either. Yes, lefties develop late, and Happ could have a long career, but we're talking Roy Halladay, the best pitcher in the American League. As for the position-playing prospects, I am torn. On the one hand, they sound really good, and the Phillies' track record of late in developing good position players has been better than it had been, say, from 1985-2002. Still, that doesn't mean that all of the mentioned players will turn out to be stars, but it stands to reason that one of them will. After all, you want the other team to get some value in a trade like this; otherwise, it will make it hard for you to trade in the (near) future, because people will wonder whether you're really offering anything of value. That said, with teams having omnipresent scouting these days, it should be hard to slip something by another team anyway.
So, let's be reasonable here. You want your team to give up as little as possible, but you want your team to land Roy Halladay. We all agree on that. The question is whether the Phillies' front office can get Halladay without giving up, say, all of its top four prospects in this trade. And, it depends on what other teams -- the Dodgers, Red Sox and Yankees -- are willing to offer.
The trade sweepstakes will be interesting to watch, but players like Halladay aren't available all that often when a) you have good prospects to trade and b) your team is primed to contend for several years. Those facts should motivate the Phillies' front office to try to get this trade done.
There are two schools of thought.
Those opposed to the trade recoil in horror at the thought of trading the next Lou Brock for Ernie Broglio, the next Jeff Bagwell for Larry Andersen, the next John Smoltz for Doyle Alexander or the next Adam Jones and four other good prospects for Erik Bedard. They are equating the prospects subject to speculation -- pitchers Kyle Drabek and Jason Knapp and outfielders Dominic Brown and Michael Taylor -- to Halladay, Chad Billingsley, Darryl Strawberry and Darryl Strawberry (the latter two, of course, without the off-the-field problems). And, of course, no one wants to trade such a potent foursome for just one Roy Halladay. Then the talk turns to whether the Phillies should trade J.A. Happ as part of the deal. Happ is 7-0, looks to be a good middle-of-the-rotation starter, has good poise, etc. Those opposed to the trade just don't want to part with Happ.
Those supportive of the trade argue that the Phillies are really primed to win now, that most prospects don't turn out to be all-stars, that pitchers get hurt (and that Drabek already has recovered from arm surgery), that Happ hasn't beaten a team with a winning record and could be the 2009 version of Marty Bystrom, the rookie pitcher in 1980 who came up in Septemer, went 5-0 and hasn't been heard from since. They argue that you have to pay a steep price in terms of prospects because Halladay is signed through 2010 and, if the Jays were to keep him, they'd get a supplemental #1 pick and the #1 pick of the team that signs him. So, it stands to reason that if the Jays were going to trade Happ, they'd want at least 3 prime prospects, perhaps 4.
I tend to agree with the pro-trade side. Happ might not turn into Bystrom, but I'm not so sure he'll turn into Warren Spahn, either. Yes, lefties develop late, and Happ could have a long career, but we're talking Roy Halladay, the best pitcher in the American League. As for the position-playing prospects, I am torn. On the one hand, they sound really good, and the Phillies' track record of late in developing good position players has been better than it had been, say, from 1985-2002. Still, that doesn't mean that all of the mentioned players will turn out to be stars, but it stands to reason that one of them will. After all, you want the other team to get some value in a trade like this; otherwise, it will make it hard for you to trade in the (near) future, because people will wonder whether you're really offering anything of value. That said, with teams having omnipresent scouting these days, it should be hard to slip something by another team anyway.
So, let's be reasonable here. You want your team to give up as little as possible, but you want your team to land Roy Halladay. We all agree on that. The question is whether the Phillies' front office can get Halladay without giving up, say, all of its top four prospects in this trade. And, it depends on what other teams -- the Dodgers, Red Sox and Yankees -- are willing to offer.
The trade sweepstakes will be interesting to watch, but players like Halladay aren't available all that often when a) you have good prospects to trade and b) your team is primed to contend for several years. Those facts should motivate the Phillies' front office to try to get this trade done.
Sunday, July 05, 2009
Phillies-Mets at Citizens Bank Park on Saturday
My son and I sat so far toward the left-field foul pole that there was no left aisle where we sat -- my seat was up against a fence. The seats were good, though, and gave us a good view of Jamie Moyer's 600th Major League start, the defensively overrated David Wright's misplay of a foul pop-pu and Omir Santos's botching of a routine foul pop-up. You can't give a Major League team five outs in an inning, let alone the Phillies, and not pay for it.
A friend who's a Mets' fan texted, offering how pathetic the Mets' are. Look, the Mets are faltering, but they're missing Carlos Beltran, Jose Reyes, Carlos Delgado, J.J. Putz and John Maine (I'd throw in Oliver Perez, but many Mets' fans want to throw him out). Anyway, the Mets are formidable competitors, and they will go on a streak at some point in the second half.
The Phillies are hurting, too. Raul Ibanez's groin pull has taken longer to heal than expected, Clay Condrey and Scott Eyre are on the DL and Brett Myers, who came on strong at the end of lasst season, probably won't return this season. Cole Hamels may be suffering from the "gap" syndrome -- a young pitcher typically doesn't fare well in a season following a season where he pitched many more innings than he did the year before. Buck Showalter highlighted this at the beginning of the season, and he may be onto something.
Still, the Phillies have the best record in baseball over the past 5 years in September and October, so look for them to stay in the hunt, make a key move, and battled hard through the end of the season.
A friend who's a Mets' fan texted, offering how pathetic the Mets' are. Look, the Mets are faltering, but they're missing Carlos Beltran, Jose Reyes, Carlos Delgado, J.J. Putz and John Maine (I'd throw in Oliver Perez, but many Mets' fans want to throw him out). Anyway, the Mets are formidable competitors, and they will go on a streak at some point in the second half.
The Phillies are hurting, too. Raul Ibanez's groin pull has taken longer to heal than expected, Clay Condrey and Scott Eyre are on the DL and Brett Myers, who came on strong at the end of lasst season, probably won't return this season. Cole Hamels may be suffering from the "gap" syndrome -- a young pitcher typically doesn't fare well in a season following a season where he pitched many more innings than he did the year before. Buck Showalter highlighted this at the beginning of the season, and he may be onto something.
Still, the Phillies have the best record in baseball over the past 5 years in September and October, so look for them to stay in the hunt, make a key move, and battled hard through the end of the season.
Princeton No Longer Will Publish Media Guides
I've always wondered about why Princeton didn't decide to discontinue the publication of media guides earlier. After all, after men's basketball (whose fortunes, while on the rise now, had waned over the past 10 years), who would read such guides other than a) the people on the team, b) parents and c) alums who played or who donate money. But the media? Hard to imagine that women's water polo or men's fencing has such an audience that they require the publication of a media guide.
I recall driving cross country about 25 years or so ago and stopping overnight near Omaha. One of the lead articles in the sports section was that the University of Nebraska (then a perennial top-5 program) had just published its media guide for football and that it was going on sale the following morning, with the line scheduled to begin at 8 a.m.
I laughed aloud, because in the Ivies (even back then) you couldn't sell media guides and, heck, who would stand in line for them? Trees will get saved, human capital will be re-deployed, and the greens at Old Nassau will be happy.
I haven't read whether the university is going to eliminate player profiles, though, on the internet. That would be a shame, and I doubt that the university would be going so far as to fail to publish pertinent facts on the website, if for the recruiting value if for no other reason.
I recall driving cross country about 25 years or so ago and stopping overnight near Omaha. One of the lead articles in the sports section was that the University of Nebraska (then a perennial top-5 program) had just published its media guide for football and that it was going on sale the following morning, with the line scheduled to begin at 8 a.m.
I laughed aloud, because in the Ivies (even back then) you couldn't sell media guides and, heck, who would stand in line for them? Trees will get saved, human capital will be re-deployed, and the greens at Old Nassau will be happy.
I haven't read whether the university is going to eliminate player profiles, though, on the internet. That would be a shame, and I doubt that the university would be going so far as to fail to publish pertinent facts on the website, if for the recruiting value if for no other reason.
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
Carlos Santana is in the Indians' Organization
Yes, the possiblities for the introductory song are endless once this phenom catcher makes the majors. He may not be as valuable to Johan, but from what Baseball Prospectus has written, he's the real deal.
And, no doubt, smooth.
And, no doubt, smooth.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Bad At-Bat of the Week
Late last week the Phillies were playing the Rays in that place that once must have been a regional distribution center for Sam's Club when Rays' pitcher Matt Garza got a bit wild. The Rays had the lead, and Garza walked three straight batters. The Phillies are rather lucky right now, clinging to first despite losing 12 of their last 14 and resembling more the Bad News Bears than the defending world champions. So, you'd figure that the Phillies were going to score some runs.
Enter Jayson Werth, the Phillies' rightfielder, who promptly swings at the first pitch, a breaking ball that he pounds into the ground. Seconds later, its a 5-2-3 double play. Two outs, men on second and third, Garza gets the next hitter, and the Rays are out of the inning and go on to win the game.
Werth is a valuable member of the Phillies, a great athlete and a solid contributor. But on this particular night, he committed a bonehead baseball play. Why? Because Garza was so wild that Werth should have been taking until the Rays' hurler threw one strike. Sure, a contrarian view would be that Garza was so wild that he was desperate to throw a strike and would even have grooved one to try to get ahead of the hitters. While that's plausible, he threw a breaking ball that didn't look like a fat pitch. And he grounded into a double play.
That's when you know your team is faring poorly. The Phillies are suffering. #2 starter Brett Myers, who was off to a rocky start, is out for the year. #1 starter Cole Hamels is laboring and #3 starter Jamie Moyer can't fool hitters all the time any more. Thankfully, #4 starter Joe Blanton has been pitching like an ace, and #5 starter J.A. Happ looks like a keeper, but he hasn't pitched a full major-league season yet. The bullpen is ailing -- Brad Lidge hasn't returned to form, set-up man Ryan Madson had his confidence shaken filling in for Lidge, lefty reliever J.C. Romero hasn't returned to form after his suspension, Scott Eyre has spent time on the D.L., Clay Condrey, who excelled in long and middle relief last year, is on the D.L. and I heard yesterday that Chan Ho Park might be joining him. Jack Taschner has struggled. All of which, of course, makes MLB TV's reality show about the Phillies' bullpen compelling watching, but make sure that you have your programs handy, as well as your medical journals.
Still, for the Phillies, it's not even July 1, and the team usually waits until late summer to put itself into high gear and then blow past its opponents. Sometimes, though, that's hard to do, and it's hard to get into that gear when not a whole lot from your prior play tells you you're able to do so. Then again, expect Raul Ibanez to return soon, Jimmy Rollins to hit better than he's been hitting, the bullpen to get healthier and the team to add a top-of-the-rotation starter before July 31. Something tells me that guy will be the Indians' Cliff Lee, not that the team needs another lefty. It's just that Jake Peavy is on the D.L. and doesn't seem to want to pitch in a hitter's park, Chris Young also is on the D.L. and as a fly-ball pitcher probably wouldn't fare well in Citizens Bank Park, Roy Halladay is on the D.L., too expensive and probably unavailable, and Roy Oswalt might not be available (he's close to the Astros' owner, has a lot of $ left on his contract and has a no-trade; then again, the Astros have a bad farm system and might want to induce Oswalt to go so that they can get a few prospects to help fortify their system). Still, you have to believe that GM Ruben Amaro is working the phones.
I don't want to put too much emphasis on Jayson Werth's at-bat, only to say that when your team isn't faring well, it does things like that.
Enter Jayson Werth, the Phillies' rightfielder, who promptly swings at the first pitch, a breaking ball that he pounds into the ground. Seconds later, its a 5-2-3 double play. Two outs, men on second and third, Garza gets the next hitter, and the Rays are out of the inning and go on to win the game.
Werth is a valuable member of the Phillies, a great athlete and a solid contributor. But on this particular night, he committed a bonehead baseball play. Why? Because Garza was so wild that Werth should have been taking until the Rays' hurler threw one strike. Sure, a contrarian view would be that Garza was so wild that he was desperate to throw a strike and would even have grooved one to try to get ahead of the hitters. While that's plausible, he threw a breaking ball that didn't look like a fat pitch. And he grounded into a double play.
That's when you know your team is faring poorly. The Phillies are suffering. #2 starter Brett Myers, who was off to a rocky start, is out for the year. #1 starter Cole Hamels is laboring and #3 starter Jamie Moyer can't fool hitters all the time any more. Thankfully, #4 starter Joe Blanton has been pitching like an ace, and #5 starter J.A. Happ looks like a keeper, but he hasn't pitched a full major-league season yet. The bullpen is ailing -- Brad Lidge hasn't returned to form, set-up man Ryan Madson had his confidence shaken filling in for Lidge, lefty reliever J.C. Romero hasn't returned to form after his suspension, Scott Eyre has spent time on the D.L., Clay Condrey, who excelled in long and middle relief last year, is on the D.L. and I heard yesterday that Chan Ho Park might be joining him. Jack Taschner has struggled. All of which, of course, makes MLB TV's reality show about the Phillies' bullpen compelling watching, but make sure that you have your programs handy, as well as your medical journals.
Still, for the Phillies, it's not even July 1, and the team usually waits until late summer to put itself into high gear and then blow past its opponents. Sometimes, though, that's hard to do, and it's hard to get into that gear when not a whole lot from your prior play tells you you're able to do so. Then again, expect Raul Ibanez to return soon, Jimmy Rollins to hit better than he's been hitting, the bullpen to get healthier and the team to add a top-of-the-rotation starter before July 31. Something tells me that guy will be the Indians' Cliff Lee, not that the team needs another lefty. It's just that Jake Peavy is on the D.L. and doesn't seem to want to pitch in a hitter's park, Chris Young also is on the D.L. and as a fly-ball pitcher probably wouldn't fare well in Citizens Bank Park, Roy Halladay is on the D.L., too expensive and probably unavailable, and Roy Oswalt might not be available (he's close to the Astros' owner, has a lot of $ left on his contract and has a no-trade; then again, the Astros have a bad farm system and might want to induce Oswalt to go so that they can get a few prospects to help fortify their system). Still, you have to believe that GM Ruben Amaro is working the phones.
I don't want to put too much emphasis on Jayson Werth's at-bat, only to say that when your team isn't faring well, it does things like that.
Joe DiMaggio Struck Out Only 369 Times in His Career
Which makes this article by ESPN's Tim Kurkjian compelling reading. Strikeouts are up significantly in the majors, and the numbers are staggering. DiMaggio's career numbers are astounding -- some players will take 1 1/2 seasons to strike out 369 times. True, the stat heads have figured out that on-base percentage and slugging percentage combined might mean more to a team than having a good contact hitter, but to what extent? And, yes, it's better to have someone who runs more like an arthritic steer fan with men on base than hit into a double play. But how healthy can it be to miss the ball as often as some players are doing? I still believe that if you have too many guys on your team who whiff more than 100 times a season, you won't score enough runs to contend.
Alternatively, I'm waiting for commentators to inform me that players like DiMaggio and Ted Williams were statistical outliers whose stats aren't likely to be replicated for a long time, and that we all should appreciate Adam Dunn -- who plays defense about as well as Denise Richards sings "Take Me Out to the Ball Game" -- more.
Have at it.
Alternatively, I'm waiting for commentators to inform me that players like DiMaggio and Ted Williams were statistical outliers whose stats aren't likely to be replicated for a long time, and that we all should appreciate Adam Dunn -- who plays defense about as well as Denise Richards sings "Take Me Out to the Ball Game" -- more.
Have at it.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Faith Renewed
I've been involved in many extracurricular activities over the years, trying to find some balance in life given the demands of the working world. Most have enabled me to contribute something to a group and make it better. Recently I've borne witness to a few where adults have acted in a less than stellar fashion, either acting out, being dishonest and showing poor character or tolerating those who do. I don't know whether such conduct has been a sign of the times, but as I shop for a new extracurricular, I have found great comfort in an activity in which my daughter recently participated.
She played on a tournament softball team, which differs from a travel team in that the roster gets chosen in the midst of a recreational league season and the team plays in a limited number of games before June 30. In contrast, travel teams get selected in late August and stay together for almost an entire year; the commitment is much greater -- for the child and the family.
I have posted in these ranks about my disappointment in certain rec league coaches, who act as though they're Tony LaRussa and seek every edge instead of Tony your neighbor who cooks a mean steak on a gas grill. That said, everything about this tournament team went well -- the coaches tried to teach as much as they could, they were a good mixture of seriousness and enthusiasm, and they stressed excellence, teamwork and harmony. Atop that, the girls were a great group -- earnest, hard working and supportive of one another. Even better, the parents were a good and supportive group, worrying more about the greater good of the team than the statistics of their children.
It was a successful season, even if the team lost many more games than it won and even if it didn't fare well in its tournaments. The team was together for only six weeks, but girls got better, girls learned new skills and made new friends.
The last time I checked, that's what this type of activity is supposed to be about.
The wins on the field will come.
But if you ask the parents, the entire season -- amidst terrible weather in the mid-atlantic region -- was terrific.
She played on a tournament softball team, which differs from a travel team in that the roster gets chosen in the midst of a recreational league season and the team plays in a limited number of games before June 30. In contrast, travel teams get selected in late August and stay together for almost an entire year; the commitment is much greater -- for the child and the family.
I have posted in these ranks about my disappointment in certain rec league coaches, who act as though they're Tony LaRussa and seek every edge instead of Tony your neighbor who cooks a mean steak on a gas grill. That said, everything about this tournament team went well -- the coaches tried to teach as much as they could, they were a good mixture of seriousness and enthusiasm, and they stressed excellence, teamwork and harmony. Atop that, the girls were a great group -- earnest, hard working and supportive of one another. Even better, the parents were a good and supportive group, worrying more about the greater good of the team than the statistics of their children.
It was a successful season, even if the team lost many more games than it won and even if it didn't fare well in its tournaments. The team was together for only six weeks, but girls got better, girls learned new skills and made new friends.
The last time I checked, that's what this type of activity is supposed to be about.
The wins on the field will come.
But if you ask the parents, the entire season -- amidst terrible weather in the mid-atlantic region -- was terrific.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Nails is Getting Hammered
Read this article from the Philadelphia Daily News about the free fall of one-time Phillies centerfielder Lenny "Nails" Dykstra. It's sad enough to read about someone's demise, but worse when it appears that the person in question just doesn't get it. Lenny Dykstra's purported empire has crumbled, but he seems beyond denial.
And it appears that he's left a whole host of problems and people in his wake.
And it appears that he's left a whole host of problems and people in his wake.
Saturday, June 20, 2009
You Don't Always Win Being Right All The Time
I don't know where I learned the proverb that is the title of this post, but I sometimes finding myself saying this to colleagues at work. It's along the lines of "pick your spots", "know when to hold 'em and know when to fold 'em" and "you might win this battle but lose the war." The linked article is a recent column by Rick Reilly of ESPN the Magazine about a college softball coach whose team won a game because of a rule that she invoked. You should read the article and determine for yourself whether the coach was right (Reilly doesn't) or whether what the coach did is what's wrong with kids' sports.
Reilly's article, though, underscores a theme that has bugged me while watching my kids' baseball and softball games this spring -- coaches behaving badly. Mind you, I'm not indicting these people -- most of whom are solid members of their community -- I'm commenting on a troubling phenomenon that will teach our kids the wrong things. Here are a few examples:
1. In one game, the coaches are umpiring because it's a makeup game and no umpires are scheduled. The coaches are each calling balls and strikes for their own pitchers. One coach is aggressive, barking sharply at the opposing players that the balls he's calling are close and that the kids should be swinging. That conduct was troubling enough. His team was leading, but the other team was rallying and drew within one run with men on base. Then, there's a close play at second base. That coach's player is obstructing the baserunner's ability to get back to second base. The opposing player stumbled headfirst back to second and was safe. So what does the coach do -- in a demonstrative, almost theatrical, way, calls the baserunner out because the league has a rule that forbids head-first slides. Forget about the obstruction, forget about the fact that the season was young -- this (at least at the time) Tony LaRussa wannabe needed to win the game. Needless to say, the other teams' kids were crushed, their rally ruined because of a technicality. A high-school coach watching the action (and whose son was on the team that benefitted from the call told me) that the call was wrong, and most of the parents left scratching their heads wondering why the coach had to act the way he did.
2. In another game, the scorekeeper for one team that is in the lead, up four runs, announces with two outs in the last inning and the bases loaded that the trailing team was on its tenth batter. The rules allow for a maximum of ten batters in one inning. The trailing team's coaches shout from the other side of the field, "no, it's only the ninth batter." The scorekeeper for the leading team persists -- he had his facts straight. He walks toward home plate and politely says, "No, I can show you, it's the tenth batter." The opposing coaches continue to shout, "Ninth batter." The scorekeeper then walks all the way toward the opposing dugout, facts ready, to prove that it was the tenth batter. Only when he gets right near the dugout the other coaches relent and say, "You're right, it's the tenth batter." Needless to say, the coaches insisting upon "ninth batter" were trying to get as many batters up there to try to win -- and by breaking the rules.
3. In the same game as game #2, the tenth batter is up with the bases loaded. He hits a line drive down the first-base line that is foul by two feet. The trailing team's first-base coach shouts "fair ball" before the umps can say anything, and he has his players scurry around the bases. The leading team gets the ball into the infield, but after three runs have scored, the batter ending up on third. They wanted to count the runs, even though the ball was clearly foul. And, if they had gotten the batter home, they would have claimed a tie game. Again, what lessons are being taught by this conduct?
4. Games have time limits of about 1:40 (read: you cannot start a new inning after you hit that mark), and there have been several instances of coaches whose teams were in the lead trying to convince the umpires not to start another inning before the 1:40 mark has been reached (you can play past 1:40 if you start the last inning before 1:40). Sometimes their lobbying has prevailed, thereby depriving the other team of a rightful shot to win the game.
5. An opposing coach was heard yelling (in a bench-jockeying fashion) to the other team's 10 year-old pitcher who was struggling, "How do you feel about that?" after the pitcher had yielded a three-run triple.
6. A group of coaches insists upon pitching only their own kids. Another parent has been a coach in many leagues and at the high-school level. He volunteers to work with the team's pitchers, because he sees that their techniques are flawed. The coaches say "we have it under control", and the team finishes in last place, their pitching horrendous. All I'll say about this one is that if I were a coach and a dad or mom showed up with expertise that I didn't have and offered to help, I'd take them up on it in a second.
I had the occasion to talk to other parents about their kids' collective experiences, and I spoke to one woman whose son is an eighth-grader and who has umpired in these games. Her son has gotten heckled by parents while umpiring a game for seven and eight year-olds, most of whom don't know the strike zone, how to charge a ball and what base to throw to. Even in those leagues, where instruction is supposed to be emphasized, the umpires get grief and sometimes played by parents who purportedly know the rules better than they do. And all I can ask is -- for what purpose?
Why? Because these are kids' games that should be fun and shouldn't be decided because of over-aggressive behavior of some fathers who perhaps don't have as much balance in their lives as they should. Look, I'll be the first one to agree that all of us can have bad days and make mistakes, and some of the behavior I've seen and heard of has come from guys whose kids are friendly with mine and who have coached my kids. But most of it hasn't, and, collectively, the behaviors form a disturbing trend -- of winning at all costs, of winning dishonestly, and of winning in an undignified fashion. Those aren't the lessons we want to be teaching our kids.
What motivates the pattern of behavior is beyond me. Sure, some kids will play in high school and some might earn admission to colleges because of their ability, with even fewer earning scholarships or playing, and with only the once in a generation kid from these parts making the Majors, and, if then, for more than a cup of coffee. Yet, you would think that some parents believe that through being more overbearing than they realize they will develop the next Chase Utley. But the last time I checked, only San Pedro de Macoris in the Dominican Republic seemed to develop boatloads of kids at once for the Majors. One can dream, I suppose, instead of teaching the fun and rewards of clean and fair competition, the need for exercise, and the good things that can come out of activities like this -- instead of simply winning.
A friend went to high school with a guy who became an All-Star. This friend grew up in the Midwest, and the future All-Star was an also-ran as a kid. He was the smallest, not the most gifted, but he was among the most determined and worked harder than anyone else. His high school career was just okay, and the kid walked on at a junior college, where his work ethic and determination paid dividends. After two years there, he went to a Pac-10 school (I believe as not even one of their elite prospects) and again, through hard work and determination, stood out. He ended up playing for about 13 years in the majors, starring for two very good teams. Of course, the guy had talent, but he worked harder and wanted it more than almost everyone else. He made it for many reasons, but not because his father invoked a technical rule early in the season to kill a rally, heckled an opposing pitcher or tried to play games with the lineup card.
Perhaps all coaches of kids' sports and all sports parents should take a step back and remember that. Yes, you do play to win, but fairly and squarely, stressing competition, preparation, smart play, hustle, teamwork and comraderie along the way.
Reilly's article, though, underscores a theme that has bugged me while watching my kids' baseball and softball games this spring -- coaches behaving badly. Mind you, I'm not indicting these people -- most of whom are solid members of their community -- I'm commenting on a troubling phenomenon that will teach our kids the wrong things. Here are a few examples:
1. In one game, the coaches are umpiring because it's a makeup game and no umpires are scheduled. The coaches are each calling balls and strikes for their own pitchers. One coach is aggressive, barking sharply at the opposing players that the balls he's calling are close and that the kids should be swinging. That conduct was troubling enough. His team was leading, but the other team was rallying and drew within one run with men on base. Then, there's a close play at second base. That coach's player is obstructing the baserunner's ability to get back to second base. The opposing player stumbled headfirst back to second and was safe. So what does the coach do -- in a demonstrative, almost theatrical, way, calls the baserunner out because the league has a rule that forbids head-first slides. Forget about the obstruction, forget about the fact that the season was young -- this (at least at the time) Tony LaRussa wannabe needed to win the game. Needless to say, the other teams' kids were crushed, their rally ruined because of a technicality. A high-school coach watching the action (and whose son was on the team that benefitted from the call told me) that the call was wrong, and most of the parents left scratching their heads wondering why the coach had to act the way he did.
2. In another game, the scorekeeper for one team that is in the lead, up four runs, announces with two outs in the last inning and the bases loaded that the trailing team was on its tenth batter. The rules allow for a maximum of ten batters in one inning. The trailing team's coaches shout from the other side of the field, "no, it's only the ninth batter." The scorekeeper for the leading team persists -- he had his facts straight. He walks toward home plate and politely says, "No, I can show you, it's the tenth batter." The opposing coaches continue to shout, "Ninth batter." The scorekeeper then walks all the way toward the opposing dugout, facts ready, to prove that it was the tenth batter. Only when he gets right near the dugout the other coaches relent and say, "You're right, it's the tenth batter." Needless to say, the coaches insisting upon "ninth batter" were trying to get as many batters up there to try to win -- and by breaking the rules.
3. In the same game as game #2, the tenth batter is up with the bases loaded. He hits a line drive down the first-base line that is foul by two feet. The trailing team's first-base coach shouts "fair ball" before the umps can say anything, and he has his players scurry around the bases. The leading team gets the ball into the infield, but after three runs have scored, the batter ending up on third. They wanted to count the runs, even though the ball was clearly foul. And, if they had gotten the batter home, they would have claimed a tie game. Again, what lessons are being taught by this conduct?
4. Games have time limits of about 1:40 (read: you cannot start a new inning after you hit that mark), and there have been several instances of coaches whose teams were in the lead trying to convince the umpires not to start another inning before the 1:40 mark has been reached (you can play past 1:40 if you start the last inning before 1:40). Sometimes their lobbying has prevailed, thereby depriving the other team of a rightful shot to win the game.
5. An opposing coach was heard yelling (in a bench-jockeying fashion) to the other team's 10 year-old pitcher who was struggling, "How do you feel about that?" after the pitcher had yielded a three-run triple.
6. A group of coaches insists upon pitching only their own kids. Another parent has been a coach in many leagues and at the high-school level. He volunteers to work with the team's pitchers, because he sees that their techniques are flawed. The coaches say "we have it under control", and the team finishes in last place, their pitching horrendous. All I'll say about this one is that if I were a coach and a dad or mom showed up with expertise that I didn't have and offered to help, I'd take them up on it in a second.
I had the occasion to talk to other parents about their kids' collective experiences, and I spoke to one woman whose son is an eighth-grader and who has umpired in these games. Her son has gotten heckled by parents while umpiring a game for seven and eight year-olds, most of whom don't know the strike zone, how to charge a ball and what base to throw to. Even in those leagues, where instruction is supposed to be emphasized, the umpires get grief and sometimes played by parents who purportedly know the rules better than they do. And all I can ask is -- for what purpose?
Why? Because these are kids' games that should be fun and shouldn't be decided because of over-aggressive behavior of some fathers who perhaps don't have as much balance in their lives as they should. Look, I'll be the first one to agree that all of us can have bad days and make mistakes, and some of the behavior I've seen and heard of has come from guys whose kids are friendly with mine and who have coached my kids. But most of it hasn't, and, collectively, the behaviors form a disturbing trend -- of winning at all costs, of winning dishonestly, and of winning in an undignified fashion. Those aren't the lessons we want to be teaching our kids.
What motivates the pattern of behavior is beyond me. Sure, some kids will play in high school and some might earn admission to colleges because of their ability, with even fewer earning scholarships or playing, and with only the once in a generation kid from these parts making the Majors, and, if then, for more than a cup of coffee. Yet, you would think that some parents believe that through being more overbearing than they realize they will develop the next Chase Utley. But the last time I checked, only San Pedro de Macoris in the Dominican Republic seemed to develop boatloads of kids at once for the Majors. One can dream, I suppose, instead of teaching the fun and rewards of clean and fair competition, the need for exercise, and the good things that can come out of activities like this -- instead of simply winning.
A friend went to high school with a guy who became an All-Star. This friend grew up in the Midwest, and the future All-Star was an also-ran as a kid. He was the smallest, not the most gifted, but he was among the most determined and worked harder than anyone else. His high school career was just okay, and the kid walked on at a junior college, where his work ethic and determination paid dividends. After two years there, he went to a Pac-10 school (I believe as not even one of their elite prospects) and again, through hard work and determination, stood out. He ended up playing for about 13 years in the majors, starring for two very good teams. Of course, the guy had talent, but he worked harder and wanted it more than almost everyone else. He made it for many reasons, but not because his father invoked a technical rule early in the season to kill a rally, heckled an opposing pitcher or tried to play games with the lineup card.
Perhaps all coaches of kids' sports and all sports parents should take a step back and remember that. Yes, you do play to win, but fairly and squarely, stressing competition, preparation, smart play, hustle, teamwork and comraderie along the way.
Friday, June 19, 2009
The Phillies' Farm System is the Best It's Been in Years
Click here for a story about a Rice-educated pitcher who is 8-1 at AA (despite not having blazing stuff or having totally mastered his pitches).
Click here for a story about a more intriguing prospect, the very large and strong outfielder, Michael Taylor, a Stanford alum who doesn't strike out much and is in the top 10 in most categories in the Eastern League.
While Savery projects as a back-end-of-the-rotation guy, it's harder to tell about Taylor except that the numbers don't lie. What I mean by that is that I've read that the only two untouchables in the Phillies' organization are OF Dominic Brown and P Kyle Drabek. That said, it's hard to believe that the Phillies will dangle Taylor unless they get someone significant in return. And with Jake Peavy, Chris Young and Roy Halladay (the latter of whom would appear to be untouchable) on the DL and big bucks owed to Roy Oswalt, it's hard to see who that someone might be.
Read the very good articles from the Philadelphia Daily News and see if you agree with me about Taylor. Still having vivid memories of the Ivan DeJesus trade (which gave both the aging Larry Bowa and the unproven Ryne Sandberg to the Cubs), I shudder to think that you'd trade Taylor for the Pirates' Ross Ohlendorf, only to see the latter have a Dick Ruthven/Tyler Green type of career while the former goes on to put up Hall of Fame numbers. Then again, picture a lineup with Rollins, Utley, Ibanez, Howard and Taylor in it, and smile, at least at the prospects for that group.
Click here for a story about a more intriguing prospect, the very large and strong outfielder, Michael Taylor, a Stanford alum who doesn't strike out much and is in the top 10 in most categories in the Eastern League.
While Savery projects as a back-end-of-the-rotation guy, it's harder to tell about Taylor except that the numbers don't lie. What I mean by that is that I've read that the only two untouchables in the Phillies' organization are OF Dominic Brown and P Kyle Drabek. That said, it's hard to believe that the Phillies will dangle Taylor unless they get someone significant in return. And with Jake Peavy, Chris Young and Roy Halladay (the latter of whom would appear to be untouchable) on the DL and big bucks owed to Roy Oswalt, it's hard to see who that someone might be.
Read the very good articles from the Philadelphia Daily News and see if you agree with me about Taylor. Still having vivid memories of the Ivan DeJesus trade (which gave both the aging Larry Bowa and the unproven Ryne Sandberg to the Cubs), I shudder to think that you'd trade Taylor for the Pirates' Ross Ohlendorf, only to see the latter have a Dick Ruthven/Tyler Green type of career while the former goes on to put up Hall of Fame numbers. Then again, picture a lineup with Rollins, Utley, Ibanez, Howard and Taylor in it, and smile, at least at the prospects for that group.
FBI Answers Question Regarding Jimmy Hoffa
You all know the "coffin corner" jokes by now, that the remains of one-time Teamsters Union head Jimmy Hoffa were buried in the end zone of Giants Stadium. I'm sure I'm not the only one who thought that with the imminent teardown of the stadium, would the FBI search for the remains of the former union leader.
The answer is no.
Read the whole thing, but the gist of it is that the FBI doesn't think that there's much to the tale. So much so that if they did think that there was something to it, they would have done some excavation work a while back.
Still, on the off chance that an FBI agent and Giants fan has the day off on the day that the end zone in question is torn up, might he show up, just in case, just out of curiosity?
Then again, if the FBI doesn't, what makes you think that the New York Post and New York Daily News won't?
The answer is no.
Read the whole thing, but the gist of it is that the FBI doesn't think that there's much to the tale. So much so that if they did think that there was something to it, they would have done some excavation work a while back.
Still, on the off chance that an FBI agent and Giants fan has the day off on the day that the end zone in question is torn up, might he show up, just in case, just out of curiosity?
Then again, if the FBI doesn't, what makes you think that the New York Post and New York Daily News won't?
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
Princeton's Austerity Measures: A Different View
This one is too good to resist, even if I risk violating one of the many eleventh commandments: "thou shall not be critical of a fellow Princetonian to others not in the Princeton family." That said, I have the utmost respect for the university's administration. Still, the university president's article about the university's austerity measures got me to thinking.
My wife drew my attention to the article by asking me if I had seen it. I confessed that I seldom read it (the class notes are usually the first draw, and sometimes the letters to the editor, which are a lot more tame now that you don't have crotchety old men writing about how the university was better before coeducation). I asked what was up, and she said, "well, it's kind of like save your can tabs." (She did not say Cantabs, by the way.).
The article is an expository essay on the measure the university has taken to save money. Raises for all but the lowest paid employees were eliminated ("reluctantly"), spending from the endowment was reduced, and each department was asked to reduce its budget by 7.5% over the next two years. The university also put all construction and renovation projects on hold. All sensible and understandable.
The president then went on to write about how her office received over 350 suggestions for cost savings, including many from alumni (I did not send an e-mail, but this post will suffice). Among the suggestions were cancelling the staff picnic, re-evaluating the policy of unlimited printing, sending faculty minutes electronically and setting up reunion tents so as to make them reusable. All well-intentioned, all creative, all from people who really care about the community.
And here are a few more:
1. Save your "boxtops for education" and give them to Princeton University. I don't know what percentage of your cereal purchases can be directed to Princeton, but you might as well make your contribution. So, when you think fiber, think Princeton.
2. Have the university sign up for a scrip program. Basically, the university can enroll, and it will earn 3% off all your purchases. So, for example, if you enroll and spend say $5,000 a year on food at your Super Stop 'n Shop, they'll send $150 to Princeton. Multiply this by say 5,000 alums, and you're talking real dough. Many institutions have programs like these. Why not the alma mater?
3. Auction off 5 seats in every freshman class. Let's face it, the Ivies would love to get the children of the wealthiest in the world (and it helps if they really can do the work). Now, each Ivy admits some of these very wealthy kids (and they can do the work) anyway, and I presume that they pay the normal freight (say $50,000 per year). Of course, the Ivies hope that the parents will donate big sums to worthy projects, and many do. But here's the thing -- they'd probably pay more for the admission, kind of like a seat license for their tickets to Giants games. So, get some hedge fund managers, Russian oligarchs (okay, so while they're holdings decreased in value, they're still worth more than most people on the planet), Saudi sheikhs, Silicon Valley venture capitalists, James Bond movie villains, banana republic dictators and the like and start the bidding. Of course, it would be discreet, with airtight security so as not to embarrass the kids. You have to figure that if courtside seats to Game 2 of the Lakers-Magic at the Staples Center went for about $50,000 per, the golden ticket to Princeton would go for $5 to $10 million easily. Getting between $25 and $50 million from the jump for a freshman class would help the university's cash flow immeasurably.
4. Put New York Times columnist, Nobel Laureate and economics professor Paul Krugman in a dunk tank. You'd figure that there are plenty of alums who've made the big bucks who find Krugman's unapologetic liberalism offensive enough to want to buy three chances at say $50,000. While Wall Street might have had a crash, it's still there, and there are enough money managers who'd pay for the opportunity to hit the target and dunk Krugman. You'd figure that you could get perhaps 500 alums to pay for this privilege and raise a cool $2.5 million annually (which is perhaps more than you'd raise if you tried to auction off a few lunches with the famous professor). Likewise, if you did the same with controversial ethicist Peter Singer, you'd probably be able to raise over $1 million. Forget the ability to name prizes, create awards and the like -- the carnival atmosphere is the ticket.
5. Create a major in poker and invest in a syndicate of poker playing undergraduates. Give them course credit for their exercises in probability and higher mathematics, and harvest a portion of their winnings. Figuring that you can give them disguises and send them to populate games with retirees on public pensions, you could raise another $5 or so million a year. Look, some of your undergrads make big bucks on on-line gaming anyway, so you might as well admit it and cash in. As one of my advisors once said, "they made sociology a major, and they got angry with me when I called it the science of envy." And he was pivotal in the Johnson administration.
Okay, so you get the point, times are tough everywhere, even in the Ivies, where the grounds are pristine, the buildings are well cared for, the undergrads are impressive, and the offerings are vast. It's good that all institutions are being careful with their dollars, and it's not fun when you don't get a pay raise. Everyone gets all that.
Still, if they tried some of these measures. . .
My wife drew my attention to the article by asking me if I had seen it. I confessed that I seldom read it (the class notes are usually the first draw, and sometimes the letters to the editor, which are a lot more tame now that you don't have crotchety old men writing about how the university was better before coeducation). I asked what was up, and she said, "well, it's kind of like save your can tabs." (She did not say Cantabs, by the way.).
The article is an expository essay on the measure the university has taken to save money. Raises for all but the lowest paid employees were eliminated ("reluctantly"), spending from the endowment was reduced, and each department was asked to reduce its budget by 7.5% over the next two years. The university also put all construction and renovation projects on hold. All sensible and understandable.
The president then went on to write about how her office received over 350 suggestions for cost savings, including many from alumni (I did not send an e-mail, but this post will suffice). Among the suggestions were cancelling the staff picnic, re-evaluating the policy of unlimited printing, sending faculty minutes electronically and setting up reunion tents so as to make them reusable. All well-intentioned, all creative, all from people who really care about the community.
And here are a few more:
1. Save your "boxtops for education" and give them to Princeton University. I don't know what percentage of your cereal purchases can be directed to Princeton, but you might as well make your contribution. So, when you think fiber, think Princeton.
2. Have the university sign up for a scrip program. Basically, the university can enroll, and it will earn 3% off all your purchases. So, for example, if you enroll and spend say $5,000 a year on food at your Super Stop 'n Shop, they'll send $150 to Princeton. Multiply this by say 5,000 alums, and you're talking real dough. Many institutions have programs like these. Why not the alma mater?
3. Auction off 5 seats in every freshman class. Let's face it, the Ivies would love to get the children of the wealthiest in the world (and it helps if they really can do the work). Now, each Ivy admits some of these very wealthy kids (and they can do the work) anyway, and I presume that they pay the normal freight (say $50,000 per year). Of course, the Ivies hope that the parents will donate big sums to worthy projects, and many do. But here's the thing -- they'd probably pay more for the admission, kind of like a seat license for their tickets to Giants games. So, get some hedge fund managers, Russian oligarchs (okay, so while they're holdings decreased in value, they're still worth more than most people on the planet), Saudi sheikhs, Silicon Valley venture capitalists, James Bond movie villains, banana republic dictators and the like and start the bidding. Of course, it would be discreet, with airtight security so as not to embarrass the kids. You have to figure that if courtside seats to Game 2 of the Lakers-Magic at the Staples Center went for about $50,000 per, the golden ticket to Princeton would go for $5 to $10 million easily. Getting between $25 and $50 million from the jump for a freshman class would help the university's cash flow immeasurably.
4. Put New York Times columnist, Nobel Laureate and economics professor Paul Krugman in a dunk tank. You'd figure that there are plenty of alums who've made the big bucks who find Krugman's unapologetic liberalism offensive enough to want to buy three chances at say $50,000. While Wall Street might have had a crash, it's still there, and there are enough money managers who'd pay for the opportunity to hit the target and dunk Krugman. You'd figure that you could get perhaps 500 alums to pay for this privilege and raise a cool $2.5 million annually (which is perhaps more than you'd raise if you tried to auction off a few lunches with the famous professor). Likewise, if you did the same with controversial ethicist Peter Singer, you'd probably be able to raise over $1 million. Forget the ability to name prizes, create awards and the like -- the carnival atmosphere is the ticket.
5. Create a major in poker and invest in a syndicate of poker playing undergraduates. Give them course credit for their exercises in probability and higher mathematics, and harvest a portion of their winnings. Figuring that you can give them disguises and send them to populate games with retirees on public pensions, you could raise another $5 or so million a year. Look, some of your undergrads make big bucks on on-line gaming anyway, so you might as well admit it and cash in. As one of my advisors once said, "they made sociology a major, and they got angry with me when I called it the science of envy." And he was pivotal in the Johnson administration.
Okay, so you get the point, times are tough everywhere, even in the Ivies, where the grounds are pristine, the buildings are well cared for, the undergrads are impressive, and the offerings are vast. It's good that all institutions are being careful with their dollars, and it's not fun when you don't get a pay raise. Everyone gets all that.
Still, if they tried some of these measures. . .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)