Siberian Baseball

This is my "prove it to me" face

2010-01-26T13:19:00.003-06:00

There's an interesting article on Kotaku about the spring release of MLB 2K10, which amounts to your only option for a simulation-based baseball game on the Xbox 360 this year. Obviously, you can always go out and buy "The Bigs" but if you want a game that most closely resembles what you see on TV (especially in the post-Roid era) this is it.

For the record, last year was the first time in a decade that I opted for none of the above when springtime rolled around and I needed my baseball fix. If you need any explanation as to why, look no further than the review's first few sentences:

2K Sports' baseball franchise, maybe more than any other sports title, will have this year's title judged against and compared to last year's offering, and not for its good qualities.

It's hard to tell whether last year's MLB 2K9 - one of the worst-reviewed (and deservedly so) games ever for this class of sports simulation - raises or lowers consumer expectations for MLB 2K10. 2K9 suffered from glitches, clipping, bizarre baserunning and fielding AI, and, frankly, unacceptable graphics, especially in the player modeling.

Setting that aside, I was unimpressed with the buggy nature of the previous offering and decided that I wasn't going to waste any more money until I saw some signs of improvement.

It's become industry standard for sports titles to update rosters, add new stadiums and introduce a new control gimmick, regardless of the sport. Jump around to reviews of the Madden franchise and you'll likely see complaints that echo those thoughts.

At the core, however, I require the games to play and play well. Unfortunately, after signing the exclusive license, 2K went off the rails with its baseball offerings. Those shortcoming are well-documented here. And here. And here (which is my favorite, as I got to title a post, "Thanks for the bobblehead, a-holes).

By this early report, it looks like the franchise might be on the mend - but I still find it appalling that the reason they claim last year was such a failure was a nine-month production timeline. While I can appreciate that the team is apparently taking responsibility for such a failure, that doesn't do much to restore their credibility until they start to produce a worthwhile product again.

More than that, where's the pressure from MLB to get this right or to step aside for someone who can produce? They have essentially handed their exclusive license over to a company that not only shoots themselves in the foot, but also edges baseball out of a market that is already dominated by the Maddens and FIFAs of the world.

By my count, it's been 2 or 3 years since I've seen a respectable game for the 360 and I'm out of patience. I can only imagine how upset the league must be at this point.

(Image from: 2kSports.com)

The Hawk landed... we get it

2010-01-06T19:04:00.002-06:00

Anyone surfing through MLB.com today learned two things.

First, Andre Dawson was elected to the Hall of Fame with 77.9 percent of the votes and second, MLB.com's writers and editors are really married to that "Hawk has landed" headline. So much so, they went back to the well for the embedded video.

I can only imagine how the Chicago media will handle it tonight at 10 p.m. I'm sure it will be reserved and pun-free.

Two things stick out in my mind regarding Dawson and his career with the Cubs. I now know the back story of the blank contract gamble - one of the ballsiest moves he could have made that offseason and a story that lives on as example of how players of yesterday were somehow playing for the game. Honestly, I think the truth lies somewhere between "players are just looking for the cash grab" and "players before 1990 would have played for free, they just loved baseball that much."

It's a bit strange to look back now and see this as one of the last times that I was totally unaware of the politics and economics of professional sports. I knew that Keith Moreland was no longer the starting right fielder, knew that Dawson was really, really good, but still had no real idea of what had just happened.

While that's pretty insignificant in the bigger picture of Dawson's career and election to the hall, it's a major piece of this puzzle for me. This is where I oversimplify in the name of nostalgia and sepia-hued memories of summers past.

It was only a few years after the Dawson deal that I started getting an expanded world view, saw Greg Maddux leave for contractual reasons (a landmark, "Wait, what???" moment in my young life) and started to quietly resent any front office of my chosen teams unless they had delivered a championship in the past 365 days.

I love picking apart deals, debating how much of a role Mark Teixeiras' wife had in landing him in the Bronx and playfully picking fights with Frank over what role a Kenny Williams man-crush has in his judgement from year to year.

On the other hand, there's quite a bit to be said for being ignorant to the process and just watching new players appear in the field on Opening Day. I imagine this is much like enjoying sausage because you never have to see it made.

Finally, I can't shake the image of Dawson at Ryne Sandberg's induction a few years ago, moving so gingerly because his knees have really given out on him. It was a little hard to watch, but incredibly powerful to see Sandberg recognize Dawson from the podium. Because of this, of course there is no video available to link here. I'll keep looking.

Instead, here's a transcript from the day:

Andre Dawson, the Hawk. No player in baseball history worked harder, suffered more or did it better than Andre Dawson. He's the best I've ever seen. Stand up Hawk. The Hawk. I watched him win MVP for a last place team in 1987 and it was the most unbelievable thing I've ever seen in baseball. He did it the right way, the natural way and he did it in the field and on the bases and in every way, and I hope he will stand up here someday. We didn't get to a World Series together but we almost got there, Hawk. That's my regret, that we didn't get to a World Series for Cub fans. I was in the post season twice and I'm thankful for that. Twice we came close.

I'll be looking foward to the statues of both players popping up outside of Wrigley in the next year or two.

Under the fold on this story are the players who didn't make the cut this year. Bert Blyleven missed yet again, but by only five votes this time around. Keeping in mind that players need 75 percent of the vote or better, here were the players who gained a majority of the votes this time around:

Bert Blyleven - 74.2%
Roberto Alomar - 73.7%
Jack Morris - 52.3%
Barry Larkin - 51.6%

Bringing up the rear with 0% of the votes were Todd Zeile, Shane Reynolds, Ray Lankford and Mike Jackson (the former pitcher for the Phillies, Mariners, Giants, Reds, Indians, Astros, Twins and White Sox, not the deceased King of Pop. That would be weird.)

(Image from: CNNSI.com)

Where's the credit for Dom DiMaggio?

2009-05-08T21:41:00.003-05:00

Dom DiMaggio just had a nice little eulogy spoken about him by Vin Scully in tonight's Dodger game, where I first heard that he had passed away today at the age of 92. However, even a broadcaster as masterful as Scully couldn't work around the big shadow in DiMaggio's life - his brother, Joe.

In a quirk of genetics, three of the nine DiMaggio's made the majors - Vince, Joe and Dom - and even today as obituaries start to populate across the web, most mention Joe straight away. To do so is to sell Dom short as has been happening for decades now. Some of the wrtie-ups I've read tonight raise the question of whether Dom would have made the Hall of Fame by now if he'd been allowed to play instead of joining the Navy during World War II, while others hint at the role that constant comparisons to Joe played in the voting process.

Dom was seemingly always underestimated for one reason or another. His 5-9 frame and glasses - gasp, glasses! - led to his nickname, "The Professor" and it was those glasses that led to his transition to the outfield. Anecdotally, he was moved out there from his spot at shortstop by a manager so he wouldn't break his glasses . DiMaggio took that move and made the most of it, developing a hybrid style as a hard-charging center fielder who would close in quickly and agressively on balls hit his way.

In doing so, he became one of the greatest defensive center fielders of the time.

Additionally, he maintained a solid batting average and gave Joe a run for his money with a hitting streak of his own. As Scully pointed out, it was Joe who ended his brother's hitting streak at 30-plus games. See, there's that whole "Joe" thing again.

I imagine it's on par with being Michael Jordan's brother - both an athletic and cultural icon - where no matter what you did as a player, you'd always seem to be lacking by comparison. Don't be mistaken, this is not an Ozzie and Jose Canseco situation, Dom held his own in the majors and was a key piece of the strong Red Sox teams of the 40s and 50s.

DiMaggio was central to one of the biggest losses in Red Sox history - though not in typical Sox fashion - when an injury in the 1946 World Series led to the deciding play in the series. From the Boston Globe's excellent write up:

Mr. DiMaggio’s skill as a hitter inadvertently helped create one of the darkest moments in Red Sox history, their defeat at the hands of the St. Louis Cardinals in the seventh and deciding game of the 1946 World Series. In the top of the eight inning, he doubled home two runs to tie the game at 3-3 — but pulled a hamstring on the way to second base.

Leon Culberson replaced him in center field. In the bottom of the eighth, with two outs, the Cardinals’ Enos Slaughter tried to score from first on a single. Culberson was slow to field the ball, then made a mediocre throw to shortstop Johnny Pesky, whose throw home was too little, too late. Slaughter was safe, giving the Cardinals the lead and, half an inning later, the championship.

“If they hadn’t taken DiMaggio out of the game,” Slaughter later said of his daring sprint, “I wouldn’t have tried it.”

His time with Boston is covered nicely in David Halberstam's The Teammates, a solid, short read about the relationship between DiMaggio, Bobby Doerr, Johnny Pesky and Ted Williams. His life after baseball is covered well in the obituaries today, which describe his business sense and suggest that he'd have been a success in whatever he chose to do.

I think I like DiMaggio so much because he's an interesting man for many reasons outside of his control. Some of my favorite players of all time - Mickey Mantle, Williams, Joe DiMaggio - have major personal flaws or quirks that made them ill-suited for any sort of life outside of baseball. I am drawn to their stories that are tinged with elements of sadness and personal defeat, but which helped them to excell with a highly specialized skill set. Dom doesn't really fit that mold.

The fact that he was squarely in shadows of two of the game's giants in Williams and his brother, yet still found a way to maintain his own identity, accept and embrace his talents and move along is nothing short of extraordinary. To be comfortable enough being Dom DiMaggio to be successful and not dragged down as some may have is really a tribute to DiMaggio the man.

He was able to walk away on his own terms, start a series of successful business ventures and live to 92 (seeing two Red Sox World Series victories in the process). I think I'm with Scully here, where there's no real need to wail and feel sorrow for DiMaggio's passing, as he'd led a full life on many levels.

So here's to you, Dom DiMaggio, so much more than Joe's brother and Ted's center fielder. You'll be missed.

(Image from: WBZ.com)

Oh, you think so, Doctor?

2009-05-08T21:15:00.003-05:00

In updating my fantasy team tonight, I stumbled across this tidbit when trying to figure out what happened to Hing-Chih Kuo of the Dodgers:

Kuo finally admitted there was something wrong with his elbow after he threw two pitches over the bullpen gate and onto the field while trying to warm up to enter Friday night's game against San Diego.

Yeah, I'd say that might be cause for concern. I'd also love to see a tape of that game.

Show that man "The Crazy"

2009-04-20T15:12:00.003-05:00

It seems that Lin Brehmer is getting his way so far this year.

Now I'm wondering if the term "out of left field" really comes from the Cubs' past. The geography certainly lines up right.

(And I know the Rube Waddell story is accepted as fact, even if it seems a little hard to believe at times.)

What does MLB have to lose by lifting blackout restrictions?

2009-04-11T22:35:00.006-05:00

Like most baseball fans, I am not independently wealthy. This means that I am forced to spend large chunks of my time on this earth working to pay for all sorts of things like food, shelter and Xbox games.

Why must I do this without live baseball being streamed directly to my laptop?

As I understand it, the big reason behind blackouts is to push fans to the games (The Bill Wirtz Theory of Fan Aliention), to punish a fan base for failing to get off their lazy asses and buy tickets (we're looking at you, Minnesota Vikings fans) and to drive fans crazy by denying them a few moments of peace by watching an inning or two of the home team while they eat lunch at work.

There are certain instances - especially regarding technology - where policies that once made a lot of sense are suddenly made less sensible. This seems to be one of those cases.

While the easiest solution would be to find a fan in a town you have zero interest in (like Toronto) and swap logins with them, I question why the league hasn't lifted blackouts on the web. I can watch both Cubs and White Sox games (home and away) at home, but I'm guessing that hauling in a TV to my desk might raise a few eyebrows.

No one in their right mind is going to opt for a streamed ballgame above high def or going to a game in person. This is pretty much a last, best option for those of us stuck at work during day games or forced to stay late from time to time.

When I don't see the local teams on the MLB Extra Innings package, it makes sense - the games are on local TV anyways. When I can't see them on a web broadcast, it just makes me think MLB doesn't want to be my friend anymore.

Does anyone have an explaination for these odd blackout rules?

Oh, Canada... How could you?

2009-04-08T22:42:00.002-05:00

I know that baseball probably isn't much of a draw in Canada, but there have to be a few fans scattered throughout the country, right?

I bring this up because the following appears in the line items for MLB.com's online streaming package:

All live Toronto Blue Jays games are blacked out throughout the entire country of Canada.

Ouch. Sucks to be a fan of the Jays.

Play Ball

2009-04-06T20:57:00.003-05:00

In observance of Opening Day for the Cubs and Sox, the Tribune posted a photo album of famous first pitchers through the years.

(They missed my favorite honoree, Chewbacca because that was at Fenway. Also, I never knew Chewy was a lefty.)

The album raises a few questions for fans with a discerning eye and a secret hope that they may some day be asked to throw out a first pitch for being the best lawn and garden salesman at Sears or the bestest blogger ever.

Like, mitt or no mitt? You won't need to catch a damn thing, so why bring the leather? Jersey open or closed? For that matter, should you have your own name on the jersey? Because Michael Jordan wore a Sammy Sosa jersey when he took the mound at Wrigley.

I think the balance falls between looking like you're trying too hard and looking like you really don't care in case you suck. I think the open jersey look says, "I'm here to do this, but I'm a celebrity, so I'm far too cool and busy to practice tossing a ball beforehand."

On the other side of the fence is the desire to really suit up - some in their astronaut suits - before they take the field. I'm not sure how far people can push the envelope in this regard, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't lose a little respect for Will Ferrell when he opted out on the baseball pants and spikes combo.

That's an outfit to give Chewbacca a run for his money.

(Image from: The Boston Globe)

MLB.com shows it has a sense of humor

2009-04-01T21:33:00.004-05:00

It's the usual storyline, but for some reason, the headline struck me as funny tonight. (I'd like to point out that this likely the 100th anniversary of the first Cubs fan saying, "This is the year.")

Tonight, as the third story on the MLB.com home page was the headline, "Once again, this could be the year."

It seems like even MLB.com might be sick of its own hype. Just look at the monster they've created.

* Maybe they want to re-evaluate running commercials with Dontrelle Willis in them for right now? Just let the poor guy lay low for a few weeks until he feels a bit better?

* God, how I've missed the wit and wisdom of Mark Grace. On the pre-season replay MLB Network is running right now, there was just a 30-second conversation about how he was not a "stats" guy.

To kill time, Grace was being asked if he would be following and of a host of categories from WHIP to BABIP. After each stat listed, Grace would just utter a "nope" or a "nuh-uh."

Preseason baseball is the best, especially when the announcers just assume no one is listening anyways. It's like a real life Harry DOyle, but with a little less alcohol.

Marlins offically put down roots in Miami

2009-03-24T12:00:00.000-05:00

The Tulsa Sound Machine.

Spokane Vice.

The Miami Marlins?

Monday marked the day that the Florida Marlins signed off on a new home and a new-ish name, as the Miami city council approved a stadium deal to take the Marlins out of Dolphin Stadium and give them a home of their own. Who says the housing market is tanking?

According to the Palm Beach Post:

The financial breakdown on the $634 million stadium plan is top-heavy for the county. Miami-Dade is on the hook for $297 million from tourist taxes, another $50 million from a separate bond referendum, and $12 million for road and utility repairs.

Miami pledged last week to spend $94 million on the parking structures, $13 million toward stadium construction, and $12 million for other improvements.

Miami will also operate the garage and pay the yearly debt payment, though the Marlins have agreed to buy most of the expected 6,000 parking spaces at between $10 and $12 over the 35-year stadium contract. The Marlins keep any profits made from selling those spots.

The Marlins will spend $120 million in the later years of construction, and pay the county back another $35 million of borrowed money.

Additionally, the team is penalized if it backs out of the deal early, with the city and county splitting profits on a descending scale for the next decade. If the Marlins ownership should choose to sell the team in the first year of construction, the city and county would split 70 prcent of the profits. The team retains all profits beginning in 10 years.

Good for them.

Also, as NPR pointed out this morning, the team is backing away from the trend to market to a region (the Minnesota Twins, New England Patriots or Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim) to try and snap up more merchandising revenue. The team will go from the Florida Marlins to the Miami Marlins, in a move that makes me like that team a little more, despite their participation in the 2003 post-season games that mentally crippled the city of Chicago for several years.

What really caught my eye was a throwaway line in the article, which read, "The Marlins, despite their winning ways, are consistently among the bottom in baseball in payroll and attendance."

While I guess all of those statements are true - counting two World Series titles as winning ways and not dwelling the low spots in between - it surprises me a bit that there's not a bigger fan following of the team. More than that, the Marlins seem to be caught in the middle ground after a series of fire sales following their championship runs that have to be damaging to the team.

While prior owners have cried poor (especially regarding the stadium issues) before selling off a winning team, hopefully this new deal helps to cut down on that. My only question is why south Florida needs a retractable roof, when Minnesota decided to pass on that option. Must be those balmy Minneapolis autumns I miss so dearly.

(Image from: Ballparks.com)

Didn't they just do this?

2009-03-18T22:37:00.002-05:00

Correct me if I'm wrong. but didn't they just resod Wrigley Field last season?

Is this a new yearly tradition, or is the Chicago Tribune struggling for copy to put on the web site these days?

Regardless, there's a small photo gallery up of the whole shooting match, for you to peruse. Also, is it too much to ask the grounds crew to maintain the grass from year to year?

I mean, part of the romance of baseball is seeing the same stadiums that hosted Babe Ruth, Willie Mays and Ted Williams. With that is the idea that the field is the same as it was for those Hall of Famers.

Now to learn this? It's downright shocking.

Petey to the Cubs?

2009-03-11T22:11:00.003-05:00

Not that this is practical for either Pedro Martinez or the Chicago Cubs, but the possibility is out there that everyone's favorite Dominican hurler might end up in Cubbie blue.

I assume this is in the same vein as the DePaul men's basketball team possibly making the NCAA tournament by winning the conference tourney (they didn't) or the Cubs possibly winning the World Series this year (they probably won't) or the beer vendors at the Cell possibly exercising discretion in serving patrons in the upper deck (another probably won't).

Still, it's something fun to talk about until you realize that Martinez will likely sign anything placed in front of him to play in Los Angeles with his old pal, Manny Ramirez. This includes an In n Out Burger napkin with the words, "Pedro + Dodgers = 10-15 games or so in 2009?"

Keep in mind the stories that came out of New York after Martinez left the Red Sox and was supposeedly sending Ramirez notes on a consiteint basis, trying to sweet talk Manny into heading to the Big Apple. I'll be surprised if he ends up anywhere but there, assuming his arm keeps looking as solid as it has in WBC play.

Crede cuts ties to White Sox, moves to rival

2009-02-21T08:29:00.004-06:00

The Chicago Auto Show is taking place downtown this week and heading down for a day has become a minor tradition for my brother-in-law and me. This makes for interesting timing, as we spent part of last year's visit discussing the future of Joe Crede and what the White Sox would do at third base for the 2008 season.

As of this morning, we'll have to think of something else to talk about.

Crede was in the Twin Cities to take his physical and presumably get back on a plane to Fort Myers, where he stands to be the starter at third for the Twins unless he gets hurt again. White Sox fans are more than aware that Crede's back has been a little iffy lately. This could very well be Chicago's version of a Trojan Horse in free agency form.

From the Twins site:

The Minneapolis Star Tribune is reporting that the deal features a base salary of $2.5 million, with the chance to earn $7 million in appearance bonuses. The bonuses begin once Crede reaches 250 plate appearances and tops out at $7 million following his 525th plate appearance...

The structure of the contract should help protect the Twins if Crede doesn't prove to be healthy. Crede, 30, has been limited to just 144 games the past two seasons due to back injuries. He's undergone two back surgeries over that time span, including one this past fall to remove a nerve impingement. His agent, Scott Boras, has told reporters that Crede is ready to go for Spring Training.

Back in Chicago, the team put a feature up on their site to pump up Fields a bit, drawing odd comparisons between Crede/Fields and Brett Favre/Aaron Rodgers. I know, weird, huh?

More interesting were the Green Bay parallels that ran right down to managing fan expectations of the new guy getting set to take over.

From the White Sox site:

Truth be told, Fields might not wind up quite as spectacular as a healthy Crede was with the glove at the hot corner. He might never win any accolades for his fielding.

Then again, a scant few third basemen match up with Crede when he's on his game. The present concern for Fields is not these personal highlights, as much as simply fitting into the White Sox big picture. To reach this goal, Fields knew his defensive play had to improve from an inconsistent 2008...

In 2007, Fields hit 23 home runs and drove in 67 over 100 games. In 2008, Fields hit .156 without a home run over 14 games. When Crede went down because of his balky back, the White Sox opted to start Juan Uribe at third because of his stronger defense.

(Image from: MLBlogs.com)

But does the damn thing work?

2009-02-16T20:33:00.003-06:00

Like a moth to a flame, people are getting excited about the newest offering from 2K Sports as baseball season approaches.

Apparently gamers are just gluttons for punishment with short memories - regardless of whether or not they're also Cubs fans.

Gamespot has the breakdown between MLB 2K9 and MLB 09: The Show (the PS3 offering that continually ranks higher than the 2K9 version). It's worth mentioning that because of the respective contracts involved, 2K owns the rights to produce games for every platform with their MLB license, while The Show is only available for Sony platforms.

Here are last year's posts when I initially picked up MLB 2K8 and proceeded to get increasingly pissed off as the game remained a trash heap of bugs, the forums descended into chaos and rumors and name-calling.

I guess that's why I'm concerned to see new features and graphics being pimped as the reason to buy this year's ~~attempt at a~~ video game. While I can certainly understand a company's reluctance to promote a product on the basis of, "We suck less this year!" I'd really appreciate an acknowledgment of customer concerns that have carried over from year to year.

Features are great, the card system was fun when it worked and I did legitimately enjoy the new pitching interface they unveiled last year. However, when I put the game away for good, it wasn't because there weren't enough bells and whistles, it was when the game crashed for the third or fourth time in a month.

Fix pesky little details like that and I'll consider forking over another $60 this year.

(Image from: Gamespot.com)

Welcome back, baseball

2009-02-15T21:11:00.003-06:00

Taken straight from the Chicago Tribune pictures of the day:

Ready for pitchers and catchers
(AP photo by Jeff Roberson / February 13, 2009)
Baltimore Orioles clubhouse worker Sammy Sanchez rubs mud on a new baseball as the team prepares for the start of spring training baseball in Fort Lauderdale, Fla. The Orioles' pitchers and catchers will have their first workout on Sunday.

Hank Aaron has a good sense of perspective

2009-02-15T19:51:00.002-06:00

The word out of Atlanta is that Hank Aaron is probably the person in baseball who is least upset by the Alex Rodriguez flap and talk of returning the home run record to him.

From Terence Moore's column (via Deadspin):

“If you did that, you’d have to go back and change all kinds of records, and the [home run] record was very important to me,” Aaron said. “It’s probably the most hallowed record out there, as far as I’m concerned, but it’s now in the hands of somebody else. It belongs to Barry. No matter how we look at it, it’s his record, and I held it for a long time. But my take on all of this has always been the same. I’m not going to say that Barry’s got it because of this or because of that, because I don’t know.”

I hope someone cuts this out of the newspaper and leaves it for the '72 Dolphins to read.

Don't mess with Texas

2009-02-12T02:02:00.004-06:00

Don't let it be said that Texans don't know how to hold a grudge. While many of the nation's newspapers have moved on from the Alex Rodriguez steroid scandal feeding frenzy, Texas has been vocal throughout the week.

For anyone not using the Sports Overdose Grid for their sport of choice, may God have mercy on your soul, but more to the immediate point, the Rangers team box has four of the top five links headed to stories or columns ripping Rodriguez tonight.

My favorite is the devil's advocate piece filed by the Fort Worth Star-Telegram's Gil Lebreton. In it, he questions why Rodriguez would be assumed innocent as he paints the Ranger clubhouse as a den of inequity.

More than that, why would he stop using when he was traded to one of MLB's flagship franchises? There are several good points in play here.

For all of his considerable on-field talents, Rodriguez arrived in Texas as not only the richest man in baseball, but perhaps its most insecure. It doesn’t make sense that he would be traded to a storied franchise such as the New York Yankees and suddenly no longer be engulfed by his unremitting need to please.

Nor am I buying A-Roid’s implication that steroids weren’t tempting until he came to the Rangers. What was he trying to say? That Pudge or Palmeiro made him do it?

How do we know that Rodriguez himself isn’t the one who "introduced" steroids to that Rangers clubhouse? That suggestion isn’t any more unfair than the ones that A-Roid was tossing out.

He goes on to point an accusing finger at superagent Scott Boras as a common thread in those who have turned up dirty in steroid investigations.

While people are compiling a Hall of Shame for the Rangers franchise, therefore, let’s go down another list, one that includes Kevin Brown, Rick Ankiel, Scott Schoeneweis, Barry Bonds and Gary Sheffield.

All, at one time or another, have been Boras clients. All have been mentioned in connection with the Mitchell Report.

Just a coincidence, probably. But Boras has always prided himself on being a full-service agency, one that takes interest in all of his clients’ needs, including the athletes’ conditioning.

Good points, but what's the over/under on the lawsuit from Boras' office for slander? I say lunch on Thursday.

(Image from: AskMen.com)

There's just no way

2009-02-11T01:47:00.003-06:00

One of the big links floating today is the Baseball Prospectus win/loss projections for the year and for those keeping an eye on Chicago, it's feast or famine.

The Cubs are predicted to finish an NL-best 95-67, while the White Sox are being projected to finish last in the AL Central, with a record of 74-88.

No way do the White Sox do that poorly, to finish a (hypothetical) game behind the Royals.

No word on whether or not the Dodgers get a bump if they win back Manny Ramirez's heart.

Brewers screwed, screwed again

2009-02-07T21:45:00.003-06:00

Yes, I am aware of the Alex Rodriguez free for all that is taking place this weekend and no, I'm not planning to waste a lot of time on it right now.

I had my fill of that between the Great Barry Bonds blogger gold rush and the Mitchell Report's release last spring. Drugs are bad, sanctity of the game, rinse, repeat.

Instead, check out this MLB.com explanation of why the Brewers really didn't make out too well in their late summer fling with CC Sabathia now that he's made his jump to New York.

Understanding the Brewers' disappointment requires a primer on Draft-pick compensation. Free agents are assigned point values and letter classifications based on a system developed nearly three decades ago by the Elias Sports Bureau that considers players' performance over the prior two seasons.

Sabathia and Sheets both qualified as "Type A" free agents, and such players come at an extra price. Their new team must forfeit a first- or second-round Draft pick to the player's former team as compensation, based on the new team's selection in the upcoming First-Year Player Draft. Generally, if the player's new team finished in the top half of the standings in the previous season and thus selects in the bottom half of the first round of the Draft, that selection goes to the player's former club. If the new team selects in the top half of the first round, its first-round selection is protected but it must instead forfeit a second-round pick.

Teams that lose top-tier free agents also get a "sandwich pick" between the first- and second rounds of the draft for each Type-A player who departs.

That's where things got sticky for Milwaukee. I can only imagine it's roughly the same feeling you get when you realize that you forgot to pay taxes on a big win in Las Vegas.

Remember that other big signing the Yankees made this year? Mark Teixiera? Yeah, guess who was one of the only other players ranked higher than Sabathia in the Elias rankings?

But the first bit of bad news came on Dec. 23, when the Yankees' continued their spending spree by agreeing to terms with former Angels first baseman Mark Teixeira. Like Sabathia, Teixeira was a Type A free agent, and since his Elias ranking was ever so slightly higher (98.889, to Sabathia's 98.110), the Angels suddenly were in line to receive New York's first-round pick and the Brewers were pushed to the second round...

How's this for bad luck: Teixeira was the only free agent with a higher numerical ranking than Sabathia. In fact, only one other non-free agent owned a higher number, outfielder Matt Holliday, at 98.125.

Ouch.

Compounding the problem is Ben Sheets' elbow surgery that derailed a deal with the Texas Rangers and their associated draft picks. He's expected to be back in the middle of the 2009 season. That might not matter much to the Brewers, as if he's still floating around after June 9 (the amateur draft), Milwaukee gets nothing in return.

And they likely have to pay for the surgery, since it happened on their watch. Milwaukee trainers determined that no surgery would be needed, only rest, which was the story until the Rangers uncovered the lingering elbow issues in their physical.

So, let's recap.

The Brewers have their best season in years and make the playoffs. The best pitcher on that team then bolts for the calm of New York City (true story) and the man who has been their most-recognized pitcher for years is damaged goods and so he's worthless to the team, even as he's on the way out.

According to the team web site, the Brewers' starting rotation now looks like this: Manny Parra, Yovani Gallardo, Jeff Suppan, Dave Bush and Chris Capuano.

Pitchers and catchers report next week, Packer training camp is usually in mid-July.

(Image from: Newsday.com)

We'll miss you, Mr. Updike

2009-01-27T20:34:00.004-06:00

John Updike died today and aside from his numerous contributions to the educational canons of most major colleges and universities - he was a personal favorite of mine during my first attempt at college - he is fairly well known for his account of Ted Williams' last day at Fenway.

While I'd be hard pressed to quote anything he wrote word for word (and I doubt I could even do justice with a loose paraphrasing at this point) I always liked Updike's work because it seemed honest and never reached too far for my tastes.

I dug that about him.

The full text of Hub Fans Bid Kid Adieu is available here. A nice slice of the work is at the end of this post as well.

I'll miss you, Mr. Updike. Anyone who can compare Williams' tenure with the Red Sox as a marriage, subject to the ups, downs, scuffles and tender moments is someone that understands a lot about life and baseball and if that's what ends up on my tombstone, I'll consider it a victory.

First, there was the by now legendary epoch when the young bridegroom came out of the West, announced "All I want out of life is that when I walk down the street folks will say 'There goes the greatest hitter who ever lived.'" The dowagers of local journalism attempted to give elementary deportment lessons to this child who spake as a god, and to their horror were themselves rebuked.

Thus began the long exchange of backbiting, bat-flipping, booing, and spitting that has distinguished Williams' public relations. The spitting incidents of 1957 and 1958 and the similar dockside courtesies that Williams has now and then extended to the grandstand should be judged against this background: the left-field stands at Fenway for twenty years have held a large number of customers who have bought their way in primarily for the privilege of showering abuse on Williams. Greatness necessarily attracts debunkers, but in Williams' case the hostility has been systematic and unappeasable. His basic offense against the fans has been to wish that they weren't there.

Seeking a perfectionist's vacuum, he has quixotically desired to sever the game from the ground of paid spectatorship and publicity that supports it. Hence his refusal to tip his cap to the crowd or turn the other cheek to newsmen. It has been a costly theory—it has probably cost him, among other evidences of good will, two Most Valuable Player awards, which are voted by reporters—but he has held to it from his rookie year on.

While his critics, oral and literary, remained beyond the reach of his discipline, the opposing pitchers were accessible, and he spanked them to the tune of .406 in 1941. He slumped to .356 in 1942 and went off to war.

See you later, Under Armour

2009-01-23T20:07:00.003-06:00

Money seems to be the topic of the day at Clark and Addison, so who am I to fight the trend?

Under Armour (and for the record, I blame the superfluous "u" for all of this) came up a bit short when it came to yearly revenue and essentially told the Cubs that they can stop waiting for payment from them because it's not coming.

You'll remember that the Under Armour ads on the walls were the source of debate when they went up on the outfield doors last year. After bricks and ivy for years, the Cubs sold the rights to paint the metal doors and the howls about the tradition of the game being in peril began.

Well, it shouldn't be an issue any more. From the Sun-Times:

Under Armour, in exchange for marketing benefits, agreed to give the Cubs $10.8 million to be the “Official Performance Brand” of the team from the 2009-13 seasons, according to the suit.

However, Under Armour's year-end earnings were “lower than expected and did not meet industry expectations,” the suit said. The company’s stock fell 15 percent and according to the suit, Under Armour expects its 2008 income to be $10 million less than 2007's.

When executives realized their financial situation in December, the Cubs claim they breached the contract and told the team the $10.8 million would not be coming.

Ummm... Can they do that? Because I can't do that.

More surprising is the line, "The suit asks a federal court to prohibit Under Armour from disregarding its agreement with the Cubs." I'm no lawyer, but it sounds like Under Armour has opted for the, "Uh, yeah, dude. I'm not paying you back for that," defense.

Under Armour! The deadbeat college roommate of the sports apparel world!

(Image from MouthPieceSports.com)

Wrigley faithful, meet your new daddy

2009-01-23T12:51:00.003-06:00

Assuming all the paperwork goes along smoothly, Cubs fans can expect an end to their seasons of nightmare where their team played without a big boss in charge.

After years under corporate control in the Tribune media machine, the team is lined up to be the property of the Ricketts family in the next few days. After an early release where they were essentially tabbed "bidding group A" - which terrifies any fans who also follow Illinois politics and assume any lettered entity to be a high-profile witness in a corruption trial - the Tribune released word that the Ricketts were the answer to the big question for the ballclub.

The Tribune reports:

The family, which has Chicago connections but made its fortune building a discount stock brokerage in Omaha, confirmed Thursday night that it has been selected by Tribune Co. to begin exclusive negotiations to buy the team, Wrigley Field and a 25 percent stake in Comcast SportsNet, a regional cable network.

Sources put the value of the bid at about $900 million. That works out to $9 million for each season since the team's last World Series title in 1908.

Thanks for clearing that up, guys. I need to know every piece of Cubs-related trivia in relation to years of futility. It really helps define me as a person.

The article goes on to explain what the process is (especially in the context of the current credit crater).

The family will have to hammer out a final agreement with Tribune Co. and secure financing amid the worst credit markets since the Depression. Once a contract is inked, the deal must be approved by 23 of Major League Baseball's 30 owners. Cubs officials have said they hope to have the new owners in place by the start of the season in April.

So, welcome to Chicago, Ricketts family! It's a wonderful town to own a team - just ask the McCaskey's or the Wirtz's.

Hall of the Future

2009-01-13T20:38:00.004-06:00

After the Hall of Fame results were announced Monday, I got an e-mail from Frank the Tank that had a very brief message and links to the respective career numbers of Jim Rice and Andre Dawson.

It also came with intentions of a full blog post on his site to dig deeper into the issue of this specific vote.

When a White Sox fan writes to alert me to the injustice done to Dawson, it tends to perk my ears up a bit. From a personal standpoint, it was win-win for me - I like Rice and have a feeling that Dawson's time will come soon, so it was a minor sigh of relief and a feeling that the Hawk's time will come.

Frank rightly calls into question why any voter would pick one over the other and why Rice would be that one in any case. At the risk of stealing his thunder, I'll quote directly from his e-mail, because he uses pretty words:

Their offensive stats are pretty much the same over time (with Dawson having higher career totals due to a longer career). They both made 7 All-Star Games and won 1 MVP Award.

The key difference for me, though, is that Dawson also won 8 Gold Gloves (while Rice didn’t win any). Dawson, at his peak, had the best arm I had ever seen – the way he could nail guys at third base with cannon shots from right field without even a hop was unbelievable.

It seems as though Dawson was every bit the offensive player that Rice was (at the very least) while Dawson also was the best fielding right fielder of his generation (with Rice not making much of a difference as a fielder).

Am I missing something here (other than the preponderance of pro-Red Sox writers out there)?

With all due respect to the preponderance of pro-Red Sox writers, it's worth noting that Dawson eventually ended up in Boston as well, but I wonder how much his time in Montreal hurt him in this case.

Completely setting aside the fact that the man can barely stand at this point because his knees are shot from playing on the painted concrete that the Expos called a field, what else did playing in Montreal do to hinder Dawson's chances?

My immediate reaction to the e-mail was that years spent hidden north of the border couldn't have helped Dawson in this case. More to the point, this year's crop had two pitchers - Bert Blylevel and Jack Morris - who are constantly on the lists of guys the Hall missed compiled by bitter fans and heartbroken writers.

It's easy to lock in on the stars of the league, regardless of where they played - Kirby Puckett, Paul Molitor and George Brett come to mind here - but it's worth considering that if Morris had pitched for the Yankees or Blyleven for the Dodgers, they'd be in the Hall already.

Compounding these possible problems and the meat of what I've been kicking around since Monday is what impact the modern media coverage will have on future Hall votes.

There was a time in my memory where instant access to sports scores - much less video highlights or even entire games - was impossible. Unless you had a buddy who worked overnights at the local TV station, chances were that you didn't have up to the minute scoring.

Today, I can get all of this and more on the bus with my phone.

Granted, it wasn't a total media blackout in those dark days of the early 80's, but aside from a listing of scores and a video of someone falling into the dugout on a pop fly, most of the attention in the specific markets was focused on the home team and division rivals and teams with playoff aspirations if there was time.

Not so much these days.

No longer are good players lost in the shuffle by playing in small markets. If someone is playing well, ESPN will have the highlights for you to catch with your morning coffee. If a rookie starts knocking the cover off the ball, you can go back and pick things apart pitch by pitch on the league's main site and see why.

While Frank is right to question the Red Sox Nation push to put Rice in the Hall on his final ballot, keep in mind that regardless of the WGN flagship games for Dawson, it was much more likely to see Rice highlights on the east coast when the two were playing. That has to have some sort of impact.

I can see this going one of two ways with the change in how and when we get our information.

1.) Flashy players will be overvalued to a point that it will produce a lot of borderline inductees - I'll call this the Juan Pierre prototype - whose numbers won't look so hot when compared to other players. Just because a guy was always on Web Gems or always killed in your roto league doesn't mean he should be in the Hall.

2.) More attention being paid to players who would have traditionally toiled away and done really well without exposure to a national audience - I'll call this the Johan Santana in Minnesota prototype. On top of that, there are always players who do very well, but never really have a breakout season. In extreme cases, these can be great Hall candidates, but without a little flash to draw the eye, they tend to get skipped over pretty quickly.

In addition, better, more accessible stats will also help break up old logjams as voters go back to the drawing board to decide if someone is a late-ballot inductee.

Regardless, I can't see the jump in coverage failing to have some sort of effect on the way Hall ballots are cast for better or for worse. I just hope it doesn't open the floodgates for every jackass who ever ran through a wall or drilled the peanut guy, just because it got a million hits on YouTube.

As long as technology doesn't rapidly reach the voters, who are mainly old print guys, we shouldn't see much deviation for the next 15 to 20 years at least.

I think we'll be safe.

(Image from: MinorLeagueBaseball.com)

Rickey just wanted to play ball

2009-01-11T20:48:00.005-06:00

So, let's be honest. The only real suspense regarding Rickey Henderson's quest for the Hall of Fame will be whether or not he'll break Tom Seaver's record for overall vote percentage - Seaver got 98.84 percent of the vote - and whether or not he'll refer to himself in the third person when he is inducted.

I'm betting he does.

The San Francisco Chronicle does a great job of wrapping Henderson's career up in a neat little bow and separating the myth of Rickey from the actual numbers that will put him in the Hall. It's gotten pretty easy to view him as a human cartoon, given the urban legends that surround him and the Chronicle helps put those numbers back on the front page.

First all time in stolen bases (by a wide, wide margin). First in runs scored. Second in walks.

It makes Bill James' commentary seem pretty spot on and less a work of hyperbole.

According to Baseball Reference, James is on record in his 2008 Handbook as saying, "Some people have asked me whether or not Rickey Henderson belonged in the Hall of Fame. I've replied, 'If you could somehow split him in two, you'd have two Hall of Famers.'"

One of the fun things about Henderson is that stories that circulate about him have started to resemble the cottage industry of Chuck Norris sites - Rickey Henderson has counted to infinity... twice... - and, to be honest, you really never know.

At the end of his career, Henderson had been shorthand for the stupid, self-obsessed ballplayer. He was viewed as hanging on to a dead career for far too long and being a self-promoting fool. Don't feel bad for thinking this, it's probably a pretty fair assessment of how the last years of Rickey played out.

(For the record, I lump Henderson in the same category as Yogi Berra, Ozzie Guillen and others who are known for being a little nuts or stupid, but are always entertaining. I think Henderson is clever enough to know that the myth of Rickey is better served by never correcting any of the funny, but somewhat inaccurate stories. Good for him.)

Regardless, consider this story (which is totally unverified):

He called San Diego GM Kevin Towers and left the following message: “This is Rickey calling on behalf of Rickey. Rickey wants to play baseball.”

When viewed through that prism, Rickey is pretty much all you could ask for in a ballplayer.

(Image from: SI.com)

That's a good point, Bill

2009-01-06T15:14:00.003-06:00

While I swing wildly on the pro- and anti-Bill Simmons bandwagons, he was dead on in a recent mailbag discussing the Yankees' off-season spending spree.

From Simmons:

Although I cannot condone this sour-grapes quote from Sox owner John Henry after the fact.

"From the moment we arrived in Boston in late 2001, we saw it as a monumental challenge," Henry said. "We sought to reduce the financial gap, and succeeded to a degree. Now with a new stadium filled with revenue opportunities, they have leaped away from us again. So we have to be even more careful in deploying our resources."

(Note to John: They already hate us enough. Just stop. You sound like a rich prep-school kid lamenting the fact his Lamborghini isn't the most expensive car in the parking lot anymore. And while we're here, Fenway is a cash cow -- you can't play the "new stadium with revenue opportunities card" when you've done everything but stick hanging box seats on the Citgo sign.

Boston's payroll has been somewhere between $120-145 million each year for the past five. Every middle-class fan you have has been priced out unless they want to sit in the bleachers or wooden grandstand seats down the outfield lines that face second base. Just stop. Please, stop. Thank you.)

Amen.

I don't think people instinctively hate teams with high payrolls, only when they're successful and whine when they don't win with mini All-Star teams.

(If you think this post was just a weak excuse to test the new hosting capabilities as the site creeps back online, you're totally right. I should have done a redesign or something while I was at it...)