On his blazing Sunday morning NFL show, Francesa started out with this gem:
"There is so many myriad of possibilities"
What makes this so funny is not that it was one of the first sentences he used to start his show, but that a few sentences later, he CORRECTLY used the word myriad.
Of course, he then went on to call Jim Caldwell "Jim Cardwell", and Colts GM Bill Polian "Bill Polio", so I guess misusing myriad is the least of his troubles.
Francesca sucks ball again...
And can't even talk:
Just heard him say that Detroit is in the midst of an economic "turn down." Hmmmmm.
Just heard him say that Detroit is in the midst of an economic "turn down." Hmmmmm.
The Curious Case of Anthony Hargrove
The St. Louis Rams have had quite a precipitous fall from greatness since their high points in 1999 and 2001. Staff turnover and an unsettled ownership situation certainly have contributed to their poor results, but there is a different problem that I want to tackle today.Everyone knows about the Rams poor drafting record. Sure, they wasted the first three rounds of the draft from 2000 - 2008. Trung Candidate, Jacoby Shephard, John St. Clair, Damione Lewis, Adam Archuleta, Ryan Pickett, Tommy Polley, Brian Allen, Robert Thomas, Travis Fisher, Lamar Gordon, Eric Crouch, Jimmy Kennedy, Piso Tinoisamoa, Kevin Curtis, Steven Jackson, Anthony Hargrove, Alex Barron, Ron Bartell, O.J. Atogwe, Richie Incognito, Tye Hill, Joe Klopfenstein, Claude Wroten, Jon Alston, Dominique Byrd, Adam Carriker, Brian Leonard, Jonathon Wade, Chris Long, Donnie Avery, John Greco. What do they all have in common?
Yes, they mostly suck.
But more importantly, how many are still with the organization? There is nary a star amongst the bunch, although the Rams from the 2007 and 2008 draft still have a chance (lets hope).
What there are among that group is some solid NFL starters, far superior to what the Rams have right now, or whose retention may have created additional problems for the Rams.
Ryan Pickett: Let go to sign with the Green Bay Packers for 4 years/$14 million. Starting nose tackle in their 3-4 defense. Think the Rams could use a run stuffer in the middle at that price right now?
John St. Clair: Starting Right Tackle for the Cleveland Browns. Sure, the Browns may be the only team in the NFL with a smaller talent base than the Rams, and St. Clair isn't a starting tackle on a championship, or even playoff, team, but keeping St. Clair until he developed could have kept the Rams from taking Alex Barron, and instead had them draft Roddy White, Aaron Rodgers, Marlin Jackson, Logan Mankins, Michael Roos, Lofa Tatupu or Justin Miller, all of whom were drafted after Barron.
Damione Lewis: Currently the starting Defensive Tackle for the Carolina Panthers. Not great, but they have won three more games than the Rams, and may very well make the playoffs.
Mike Furrey: Currently on the Cleveland Browns, previously somewhat of a star for the Detroit Lions. Plays a little safety, wide receiver, special teams. All around hard nosed player. Caught 98 passes for over 1,000 yards in 2006 for the Lions.
Kevin Curtis: Allowed to sign with the Philadelphia Eagles, played extremely well as their #2 option until knee surgery this year.
Anthony Hargrove: Currently starting Defensive Tackle for the undefeated New Orleans Saints. Has been moved around from DE to DT, but was let go by the Rams for a 5th round pick to the Buffalo Bills. Retaining him and allowing him to develop could have prevented the Rams from drafting Carriker and Long, and instead we could be watching a team with Matt Ryan at Quarterback and Darrelle Revis at Cornerback, to name just the players drafted immediately after those d-line busts.
My point isn't so much that the Rams have drafted poorly, which they undoubtedly have, but instead that they have allowed a lot of talent to leave the organization, which has only compounded their poor drafting. Hell, even Kurt Warner was the NFC starter in the Super Bowl last year! The Rams need to start keeping talent, and even just starters, in their organization. It creates value, which can be traded or allowed to develop alongside other talent, something the Rams desperately need if they are to get back to the top of the NFL again.
Francesca sucks ball
And can't even talk:
Just heard him say that Detroit is in the midst of an economic "turn down." Hmmmmm.
Just heard him say that Detroit is in the midst of an economic "turn down." Hmmmmm.
The Mets Rotation Next Year: Not as Bad as You'd think
As I settle in to watch the great Oliver Perez and his 7.03 ERA take on his original team, the San Diego Padres, as any rational Met fan, I began to think about next season. Although our offense needs improvement, I think that some of that will come from regression to means, and health. The bullpen, with K-Rod, Putz in his option year, maybe even Wagner in his option year and Feliciano and Stokes rounding it out, shoudl be fine. My real concern, especially given the new park, is the starting rotation. And I was thinking that Oliver Perez' contract made the idea of a strong starting rotation next year an impossibility. But check this out.
Every good starting rotation needs 7 starters. Your first three are locked in, while your last two spots can rotate among three pitcher throughout the year, with one in reserve for the inevitable injury. Now, the Mets have the #1 slot filled, with Johan. Pelfrey has battled enough this season that I feel reasonably comfortable that he can be at least a good #3. Obv
iously, this means that the #2 slot needs to be filled. I think the perfect candidate is John Lackey (coming from a tougher league and division, and possibly injured, shouldn't be too expensive), but there will be trade options with teams looking to dump contracts. Or we could always go for an Erik Bedard or Doug Davis or Jason Marquis or Brett Myers.
So, that leaves two slots to be filled at the end of the rotation. Candidates for those spots include: John Maine, Oliver Perez, Bobby Parnell, Fernando Nieve, Coney Island native Nelson Figueroa, Jonathon Neise, and maybe even Brad Holt. Now, what do these pitchers all have in common? With the (notable) exception of Perez, they're all making at or close to the league minimum. So, if one of them wins the other spot behind Perez, the Mets will be spending $12 million on two rotation slots. With the average Major League salary about $3 million, not the ideal way to spend your resources, but not as bad as $12 million on one slot.
Now if only he could stop walking everyone on earth...
Every good starting rotation needs 7 starters. Your first three are locked in, while your last two spots can rotate among three pitcher throughout the year, with one in reserve for the inevitable injury. Now, the Mets have the #1 slot filled, with Johan. Pelfrey has battled enough this season that I feel reasonably comfortable that he can be at least a good #3. Obv
iously, this means that the #2 slot needs to be filled. I think the perfect candidate is John Lackey (coming from a tougher league and division, and possibly injured, shouldn't be too expensive), but there will be trade options with teams looking to dump contracts. Or we could always go for an Erik Bedard or Doug Davis or Jason Marquis or Brett Myers.So, that leaves two slots to be filled at the end of the rotation. Candidates for those spots include: John Maine, Oliver Perez, Bobby Parnell, Fernando Nieve, Coney Island native Nelson Figueroa, Jonathon Neise, and maybe even Brad Holt. Now, what do these pitchers all have in common? With the (notable) exception of Perez, they're all making at or close to the league minimum. So, if one of them wins the other spot behind Perez, the Mets will be spending $12 million on two rotation slots. With the average Major League salary about $3 million, not the ideal way to spend your resources, but not as bad as $12 million on one slot.
Now if only he could stop walking everyone on earth...
The Peter Principle in Action
The Peter Principle is a relatively simple principle that states:
Well, it is apparent that nowhere is this more evident than in the world of sports. You can point to announcers, AAAA players who are too good to keep in the minors, but maybe not good enough to make it in the majors, and, most importantly, executives.
Isiah Thomas is a hall-of-fame basketball player, but as an executive, he was horrific. Now, to be fair, Isiah did have his strengths. He was a great talent evaluator. His drafts with both the Raptors and Knicks were well-above average. Ariza, McGrady, Chandler, all far outperformed their draft spots and expectations. He was also apparently great at whispering in old rich guys' ears and getting them to turn over basketball operations to them.
What he wasn't good at, was running a team. Now, if Isiah were simply a draft guru, or even a GM, with a strong President of Basketball Operations above him, things would have been very simple, and we would all be raving about his ability to find gems in the draft. A veritable Jerry West, pre-Grizzlies. But we're not. We're talking about his miserable failure and eternal skullfucking of the Knicks. And the Raptors. And the CBA. Fuck.
The other recent example of this is now Omar Minaya. Like Thomas, Minaya is apparently blessed with the ability to find some diamonds in the rough, and evaluate some young talent. Maybe not so much with pitching, but definately with hitters and fielders. He has a great track record of landing the big fish: Bartolo Colon and Cliff Floyd in Montreal, Pedro Martinez, Carlos Beltran, Carlos Delgado, Johan Santana and Francisco Rodriguez in New York. He has a decent track record with reclamation projects and finding cheap talent.
However, He has recently proven that once those diamonds are found, and the big fish are caught, he simply can not properly evaluate the baseball marketplace and find good trades to make his team better for the long term. This all culminates with Ryan Church for Jeff Francouer. Francouer might be the worst everyday player in the National League. There is general debate about just how good of a defensive outfielder he is, but the consensus is that he is above-average. Hey, guess what? Ryan Church
is an above average defensive outfielder...who actually can hit a little. He's no world beater, but, come on, Jeff Francouer has sucked horribly for two years! And it's not like he has the track record of Gary Sheffield, a worthwhile reclamation project, who had no cost to acquire. Many news organizations were speculating that the Braves had soured on Frenchy so much that they were going to release him.
Let me say that again. Omar just traded our most consistent outfielder, and our only regular playing above-average defense...for someone who was going to be released...Well, I guess you could say that we needed a right-handed bat in a division with such tough lefties like...Scott Olsen? Sure, the Phillies have lefties, but those lefties rely on changeups, which actually makes righties WORSE matchups! But the final nail in the coffin for this trade...is that Jim Bowden thinks it's a good trade for the Mets!
"In a Hierarchy Every Employee Tends to Rise to His Level of Incompetence."
Well, it is apparent that nowhere is this more evident than in the world of sports. You can point to announcers, AAAA players who are too good to keep in the minors, but maybe not good enough to make it in the majors, and, most importantly, executives.
Isiah Thomas is a hall-of-fame basketball player, but as an executive, he was horrific. Now, to be fair, Isiah did have his strengths. He was a great talent evaluator. His drafts with both the Raptors and Knicks were well-above average. Ariza, McGrady, Chandler, all far outperformed their draft spots and expectations. He was also apparently great at whispering in old rich guys' ears and getting them to turn over basketball operations to them.
What he wasn't good at, was running a team. Now, if Isiah were simply a draft guru, or even a GM, with a strong President of Basketball Operations above him, things would have been very simple, and we would all be raving about his ability to find gems in the draft. A veritable Jerry West, pre-Grizzlies. But we're not. We're talking about his miserable failure and eternal skullfucking of the Knicks. And the Raptors. And the CBA. Fuck.
The other recent example of this is now Omar Minaya. Like Thomas, Minaya is apparently blessed with the ability to find some diamonds in the rough, and evaluate some young talent. Maybe not so much with pitching, but definately with hitters and fielders. He has a great track record of landing the big fish: Bartolo Colon and Cliff Floyd in Montreal, Pedro Martinez, Carlos Beltran, Carlos Delgado, Johan Santana and Francisco Rodriguez in New York. He has a decent track record with reclamation projects and finding cheap talent.
However, He has recently proven that once those diamonds are found, and the big fish are caught, he simply can not properly evaluate the baseball marketplace and find good trades to make his team better for the long term. This all culminates with Ryan Church for Jeff Francouer. Francouer might be the worst everyday player in the National League. There is general debate about just how good of a defensive outfielder he is, but the consensus is that he is above-average. Hey, guess what? Ryan Church
is an above average defensive outfielder...who actually can hit a little. He's no world beater, but, come on, Jeff Francouer has sucked horribly for two years! And it's not like he has the track record of Gary Sheffield, a worthwhile reclamation project, who had no cost to acquire. Many news organizations were speculating that the Braves had soured on Frenchy so much that they were going to release him.Let me say that again. Omar just traded our most consistent outfielder, and our only regular playing above-average defense...for someone who was going to be released...Well, I guess you could say that we needed a right-handed bat in a division with such tough lefties like...Scott Olsen? Sure, the Phillies have lefties, but those lefties rely on changeups, which actually makes righties WORSE matchups! But the final nail in the coffin for this trade...is that Jim Bowden thinks it's a good trade for the Mets!
Is bigger better? A comparison between the average size of an american soccer player and counterparts in other "top notch" soccer countries.
Don't be fooled by the mirage that was the American victory over the best national soccer team on Earth right now, Spain. A Spanish defender takes too long to clear a ball and a shot is completely misdirected by the Spanish keeper INTO the net, and we're an international powerhouse? American Soccer has arrived? Please. Brazil showed us how it is done by scoring five times (only three got counted) in the second half of the Confederations Cup final. A friend of mine who was an All-American and has won multiple amateur national championships suggested that we look at the following:
Well, this is a tough thing to quantify, and is something that those who have not played or watched soccer at a high level in a non-American setting just instinctively KNOW. American soccer, at a College level (basically, the highest level competitively played in the US, as the MLS is too inconsistent to really have a style), is an approximate facsimile of the British and Irish games. Long passes, hard tackles, constant running and lots of long runs and playing in the air. Now, these attributes obviously lead to the style of play favoring larger players. But, against greater competition, it is to our own detriment.
Look at the last time the United States, England or Ireland won a World Cup? Well, England won once in 1966. That's it. Instead, the championship have been won by Italy, France, Germany, Brazil. Teams hat do not necessarily feature the largets players, but the most skilled.
I think that the best comparison might be college basketball versus the NBA. There are certain practices and styles of play that work well in college basketball. The press. Two good ball handlers. Big slow white guys. Try any of those in the pros, and you'll get laughed at. The level of play is just that much higher. And that is why the best college basketball players frequently don't make the best pros. It is much the same with American soccer. Sure, four huge guys in the back and some huge forwards battling them makes for good college soccer, but what happens when they try and take that style of play to the international level? Do we want someone red carded in every single game like we almost saw at the Confederations Cup? Like Tyler Hansborough in the NBA, it doesn't work.
When you look at the US National team, the only players that are under 5'9" are Donovan, Adu and Torres. Now, lets look at some of the best players in the world:
Notice anything? Yeah, they would all be among the smallest members of the US team. I believe, as does my friend, that this is a byproduct of the systems in place and the style of play practiced.
The United States' last game against Brazil is a perfect testament to this, as is one player in particular, one Jonathan Spector, the right full back. In the first half, Spector was playing a perfect American/British game (makes sense, as he also plays for West Ham in the Premier League). Hard tackles, mugging Brazilians as soon as they touched the ball, overcompensating for mistakes with hard recovery running. Well, the Americans as a whole played like that, and they were rewarded for their efforts with two goals, including one on a counterattack where Donovan basically outran the Brazilian defender.
But what happened in the second half? Where was Spector, or the American defense, when the Brazilians took to the air? Surely, their bigger size would give them an advantage on corners and set pieces? No, the Brazilians attacked with headers again and again, and their precision passing and superior skill took over as the game wore on and the Americans became more and more tired. The cream, as they say, rose to the top.
If Americans are ever going to get serious about playing soccer at an extremely high level, about getting over the hump to join the Italys, the Brazils, the Argentinas and the Spains of the World, we have to start thinking less along the lines of who looks good running and jumping for a while and start looking at who can provide the best play over 90 minutes. They may not be the Adonis or the tallest player, but who would you rather have playing for you? Cannavaro, at 5'9", or Spector, at 6'0"? Now ask yourself who most youth soccer coaches in the US would choose?
"The premise underlying the comparison is the US promotes size and strength when selecting youth talent for development. These "bigger" players have advantages of higher quality coaching, more consistent practice schedules, and better support for their future playing careers. However, as a soccer playing country, our emphasis on size and strength during early youth development might be misguided. Are we potentially missing better skilled players, because they are "late bloomers?" How does that affect: the MLS; Our National Team..."
Well, this is a tough thing to quantify, and is something that those who have not played or watched soccer at a high level in a non-American setting just instinctively KNOW. American soccer, at a College level (basically, the highest level competitively played in the US, as the MLS is too inconsistent to really have a style), is an approximate facsimile of the British and Irish games. Long passes, hard tackles, constant running and lots of long runs and playing in the air. Now, these attributes obviously lead to the style of play favoring larger players. But, against greater competition, it is to our own detriment.
Look at the last time the United States, England or Ireland won a World Cup? Well, England won once in 1966. That's it. Instead, the championship have been won by Italy, France, Germany, Brazil. Teams hat do not necessarily feature the largets players, but the most skilled.
I think that the best comparison might be college basketball versus the NBA. There are certain practices and styles of play that work well in college basketball. The press. Two good ball handlers. Big slow white guys. Try any of those in the pros, and you'll get laughed at. The level of play is just that much higher. And that is why the best college basketball players frequently don't make the best pros. It is much the same with American soccer. Sure, four huge guys in the back and some huge forwards battling them makes for good college soccer, but what happens when they try and take that style of play to the international level? Do we want someone red carded in every single game like we almost saw at the Confederations Cup? Like Tyler Hansborough in the NBA, it doesn't work.
When you look at the US National team, the only players that are under 5'9" are Donovan, Adu and Torres. Now, lets look at some of the best players in the world:
The best player in the world right now, Messi, is 5'7", as is Emre Belözoğlu. Javier Saviola is 5'6". Allessandro Del Piero is 5'8", as is Michael Owen and as was Roberto Baggio. Fabio Cannavaro, the sweeper of the defending world champions, is 5'9".
Notice anything? Yeah, they would all be among the smallest members of the US team. I believe, as does my friend, that this is a byproduct of the systems in place and the style of play practiced.
The United States' last game against Brazil is a perfect testament to this, as is one player in particular, one Jonathan Spector, the right full back. In the first half, Spector was playing a perfect American/British game (makes sense, as he also plays for West Ham in the Premier League). Hard tackles, mugging Brazilians as soon as they touched the ball, overcompensating for mistakes with hard recovery running. Well, the Americans as a whole played like that, and they were rewarded for their efforts with two goals, including one on a counterattack where Donovan basically outran the Brazilian defender.
But what happened in the second half? Where was Spector, or the American defense, when the Brazilians took to the air? Surely, their bigger size would give them an advantage on corners and set pieces? No, the Brazilians attacked with headers again and again, and their precision passing and superior skill took over as the game wore on and the Americans became more and more tired. The cream, as they say, rose to the top.
If Americans are ever going to get serious about playing soccer at an extremely high level, about getting over the hump to join the Italys, the Brazils, the Argentinas and the Spains of the World, we have to start thinking less along the lines of who looks good running and jumping for a while and start looking at who can provide the best play over 90 minutes. They may not be the Adonis or the tallest player, but who would you rather have playing for you? Cannavaro, at 5'9", or Spector, at 6'0"? Now ask yourself who most youth soccer coaches in the US would choose?
The Knicks: Fucked?
As a sports loving male in his 20's, one of my favorite things to do used to be (is?) rebuilding my favorite sports teams via video game. The Mets with Brandon Webb and Francisco Liriano in their rotation? Sure. The Rams with Mario Williams at DE? Perfect. Of course, when you do this, you tend to keep those players that you love, that you WANT to see succeed. David Wright didn't go anywhere. Neither did Jose Reyes, or Ryan Church. Steven Jackson, Richie Incognito and OJ Agotwe? Not playing home games outside of Missouri.
Whats my point? Well, I'm a Knick fan. Always have been. Nothing was ever funnier to me than when Chris Rock said that Jermaine Jackson (R.I.P. Michael) was so greasy, he was glistening, "like Patrick Ewing in the fourth quarter. Somebody throw some sand on that nigga!!!!"
Lets run through an exercise here. Who from the Knicks would I keep, if I were playing a video game, i.e. Who do I want Donnie Walsh to keep in rebuilding the team (other than whoever LeBron tells him to)? And, I'm thinking long term (i.e. 2010), since we all know we're not going anywhere next year, and everyone knows that 2010 is when the real rebuilding (James, Wade, Bosh, Nowitzki, Stoudamire, etc...) begins.
Current Knick Players:
Wilson Chandler, Joe Crawford, Eddy Curry, Chris Duhon, Danilo Gallinari, Al Harrington, Larry Hughes, Chris Hunter, Jared Jeffries, David Lee, Cutino Mobley, Quentin Richardson, Nate Robinson, Mouhamed Sene, Chris Wilcox, Jordan Hill
Get rid of Isiah's ongoing mistakes:
Now, we all know that Donnie is going to have to force that fat fuck Eddy Curry to retire (punch him in the heart a few times?), because there's no way he's retiring and Isiah apparently gave him a contract through 2015 that is only payable in cheez doodles. Jared Jeffries could be usable for Washington, or maybe Toronto, both of whom need someone, anyone, who can play D. Additionally, both of their contracts run through 2011, so they need to go.
Allow some contracts to expire.
One of Isiah's mistakes (to be fair, this started with not letting Ewing's contract expire) was always trading expiring contracts for longer ones. That is fine if you're Cleveland and you NEED to win this year and you're close, but the Knicks? Really? Big expiring contracts next year are Harrington, Hughes, Duhon and Q-Rich.
Flotsam and Jetsam.
Joe Crawford? Chris Hunter? Mouhamed Sene and Chris Wilcox? I thought Cuttino Mobley was retired?
Restricted Free Agents.
Everyone knows that David Lee and Nate Robinson are restricted free agents this season. Now, the best course of action is to either trade them for picks or let them sign a one-year tender and then resign or leave after another year of evaluation, but that's neither here nor there. Do I want them on the team? As much as I love Nate Dogg, I don't think he's a starter. And he will demand starter's minutes and money. So he's gone. And David Lee is a great rebounder...and that's about it. Again, not a starter on a championship team unless he's playing next to Duncan or Shaq in his prime. So they're probably gone for the overall good of the team.
What we're left with.
Danillo Gallinari, Wilson Chandler, Jordan Hill
Yeah, that's it. Sad? And I would love to see any of those traded for Ricky Rubio. Or Steve Nash. Or whoever can bring us LeBron.
Sad.
Turn this mother out?
The New York Mets. Wow. We all knew before the season that the roster was top heavy. Santana. Beltran. Wright. Reyes. Rodriguez. Delgado. A combination of some improving young talent and this top-heavy collection of superstars was supposed to combine with some
luck and allow us to surpass the defending world champion Philadelphia Phillies. Optimistic? Maybe. But possible.
Now, the Mets roster has been ravaged by injuries and the question mark becomes...what to do? I think, despite us being only two games back of the Phillies, if Reyes, Beltran and Perez/Maine don't come back before the All-Star Break, the correct course of action is to reload. Not tear it down and rebuild, a la the Florida Marlins, but retool for next year. What does this entail? Glad you asked.
luck and allow us to surpass the defending world champion Philadelphia Phillies. Optimistic? Maybe. But possible.Now, the Mets roster has been ravaged by injuries and the question mark becomes...what to do? I think, despite us being only two games back of the Phillies, if Reyes, Beltran and Perez/Maine don't come back before the All-Star Break, the correct course of action is to reload. Not tear it down and rebuild, a la the Florida Marlins, but retool for next year. What does this entail? Glad you asked.
- Playing Murphy 5 days a week at first. Last year, he hit the cover off the ball; this year, he's been up and down. But if he's proven one thing at this point, he can field the position. First base, despite the legendary stache, has been somewhat of a revolving door for the Mets. Olerud. Zeile. Piazza (!!!). Jacobs. Reed. Anderson. Offerman. Should I go on? Now, Delgado has been a great player for us, but his time is up. To bring a 39-year old DH back again to play first would be repeating the Alou mistake again. With an eye towards next season, Murphy should be on first, or at least showcased a la Jacobs.
- Slowing down K-Rod. Yes, I know, he's been incredible. Better than expected. Worth every penny. But the hard-throwing K-Rod of years past is only available in bunches. He is an off-speed pitcher most of the time now (an incredible one at that). If the season is punted, what is the point of him wasting his valuable bullets on a meaningless season? This means he only pitches in some save opportunities, but we get to further evaluate what we have in Green, Stokes and possibly Holt at the end of the season.
- Slowing down Feliciano. Again, incredible season. But does anyone think that Howard, Dunn, Utley and Ibanez are going anywhere next season? Left handed relievers often rely on deception to get outs, and although Feliciano does not as much as, say, Okajima, he does vary his arm slots and pitching styles frequently. Letting these dangerous lefties to get more looks at him can only be harmful next season.
- Trying Parnell in the rotation. I know, I know, he's been crap lately as a reliever, what makes me think he could be a good starter? Well, I don't know, you don't know, and the Mets don't know if he'll be a good starter. The Mets have been lacking a hard-thrower in their rotation since the days of...help me out here...Gooden? The few games Dotel started early in his career? Worst case scenario, he flames out as a starter, goes back to the pen, and works through whatever he is going through. Best case, he shows some promise and there is some competition for Pelfrey, Perez and Maine next season. Now, this means someone gets bumped from the rotation...which leads me to my next point.
- Trading veterans. Now, I'm not talking about Beltran, Wright, Rodriguez or Santana here. But wouldn't Philadelphia or the Dodgers like Livan Hernandez at the back of their rotations? Or maybe Tim Redding? Wouldn't a team like Texas or the Angels have use for a Sheffield/Delgado DH platoon? Brian Schneider? Anyone? No? Ok, moving along, couldn't the Mariners use Luis Castillo? Or maybe the Cardinals? Doesn't he seem like a player LaRussa would love? Or, Tatis to the White Sox? Kenny Williams is a little crazy. Maybe someone needs a good backup outfielder in Reed? Boston could use Cora as SS insurance, no? The point is, free up some money, some playing time, maybe even get some ok younger players back who can keep us from filling the minor league teams with the likes of Mike DeFelice or Bobby Keilty or, gulp, Jose Lima. Maybe a good reliever emerges. Or a decent backup second baseman, or half of a lefty/righty platoon for a corner outfield spot. Whats to lose?
- Trading FOR veterans. I know, seems a little counter-productive...but not really. I'm talking about veterans, younger veterans, who can help this team for next season. Someone like...Adam Dunn? Jeremy Hermeida? Brian Roberts? Wade Davis? Carl Crawford? Alex Rios? Now, they all have their flaws, some might not be attainable or cost too much, but they can be effective pieces of a contending team next season. And maybe their teams are looking for something better THIS season?
- Give Wagner and Church a chance. What the Mets organization has against these two (non-Latin) guys is beyond me. Leave Church alone for the rest of the season. He's under team control for a few more seasons, is relatively cheap, and gives good defense in a tough position at CitiField. He draws some walks, can steal a base here and there, hits for a little power, and carried the Mets for the majority of the first half of last season. Lets see what we have with him for next season. Also, lets see what Billy Wagner has left. Yes, he's annoying. Yes, he's a loud mouth. So what? He was death on lefties when he was full-speed, so even if he shows some flashes at the end of this season, lets exercise his option for next season. Yes, it's a little expensive, but only for one season. Imagine a bullpen where you trot out a healthy Wagner in the 7th inning, a healthy Putz in the 8th (assuming his option is exercised as well) and a rested K-Rod in the 9th???????
- Think outside the box. The Mets organization has hesitated to do anything wacky. Except for playing Tatis at second. And short. And in right. Oh, and considering starting Takahasi. Oh, and closing with Luis Ayala. Oh, and playing a rookie third baseman in left. Oh, and playing an aging catcher at first. The thing these all have in common? They were forced. Lets see Murphy at second. Or Parnell in the rotation. Or Holt closing. Or Thule up here to mash some pinch-hit homers. Reward fans and evaluate what you have at the same time. Pick up Mike MacDougal off the scrap heap. Maybe he can get straightened out. Oh, wait, too late.
The Quality Start
One of the many things that sets WFAN's Mike Francesa off is the concept of a "Quality Start". Consulting Wikipedia, we find out that a Quality Start is: "awarded to a starting pitcher who completes at least six innings and permits no more than three earned runs." The article then goes on to bitch-slap Francesa upside the head by saying:
"An early criticism of the statistic, made by Moss Klein, writing in The Sporting News, is that a pitcher could conceivably meet the minimum requirements for a quality start and record a 4.50 ERA, seen as undesirable at the time. Bill James addressed this in his 1987 Baseball Abstract, saying the hypothetical example (a pitcher going exactly 6 innings and allowing exactly 3 runs) was extremely rare amongst starts recorded as quality starts, and that he doubted any pitchers had an ERA over 3.20 in their quality starts. This was later confirmed through computer analysis of all quality starts recorded from 1984 to 1991, which found that the average ERA in quality starts during that time period was 1.91"
Now, discounting statistics (as Francesa doesn't seem to understand anything more complicated than RBIs, BA and W/L record), let's look at the definition of a Quality Start, and why it is a good indicator of a pitcher's performance in the most important area of the game, giving his team a chance to win (since he himself has no control over wins and losses).
Now, we've established that a Quality Start results in the opposing team scoring 4.5 runs per game. The MLB average ERA this year is 4.33, and the average MLB team scores 4.6 runs per game. So, a Quality Start results in a more or less league average performance. So why is a league average performance deemed "quality"?
Well, once again, ignoring the exhaustive research performed by Bill James which proves this point, there is a more elemental point to be made. If Pitcher A goes 6 innings one start and gives up 6 runs, and then goes 6 innings the next start and gives up 0 runs in his next start, his ERA is an average 4.5. BUT, if Pitcher B goes 6 innings one start and gives up 3 runs, and then goes 6 innings the next start and gives up 3 runs in his next start, his ERA is an average 4.5.
The question then is: Which pitcher gave his team the best chance to win both games? Obviously, the answer is Pitcher B, as even a league average offensive performance would have resulted in two (bullpen neutral) wins.
This, as always, is another reason that Mike Francesa is a douchebag.
*Pitcher B is Greg Maddux, 1997, and Pitcher A is Oliver Perez, 2009.
** Not really.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)