Tuesday, May 24, 2011

All Star Voting: Part One

I plan to post my All Star ballot, and all the rationale behind my choices, close to the deadline to vote.  Because even though the ballots have been open for almost a month, it's still too early to be able to vote intelligently.  Other than a strict "I never vote for dodgers" policy, I try to be as objective as I can when voting.  Close calls are determined by some combination of past success and who I'd rather see in the game.  But even the most diligent voter (possibly Brian Cronin) has not even half a season's worth of stats and performance on which to base their vote.

But after something that happened today, I cannot wait until I cast my 25 ballots to talk about All Star selections.  The Giants announced (via Twitter) an All Star voting "alliance" with the Boston Red Sox.  They want Giants fans to vote for "all Red Sox and Giants players listed on the 2011 All-Star Game Ballot," with the idea being that Red Sox fans will vote for Giants on the NL side.  So I responded by asking them to clarify that they were asking people to vote for "Tejada, Belt, Burrell, Crawford and Scutaro as All Stars?"  They simply responded "Correct."

Fresno Grizzlies slugger
Brandon Belt
I realize that the Giants Twitter account is probably manned by an unpaid intern, but still.  They want us to vote for:

  • Miguel Tejada (lost his job to Mike Fontenot, back in the lineup only because Sandoval and DeRosa are hurt)
  • Brandon Belt (sent to AAA over a month ago)
  • Pat Burrell (lost his starting job to some combination of Nate Schierholtz and Aaron Rowand)
  • Carl Crawford (dropped from 1st in the Red Sox lineup to 8th, due to his .215 batting average)
  • Marco Scutaro (lost his job to Jed Lowrie).  


And that's not even mentioning the other undeserving Giants and Sox on the ballot, like:

  • Pablo Sandoval (on the DL)
  • Dustin Pedroia (.246, 2 HR)
  • Jarrod Saltalamacchia (.229, 3 HR)
  • J.D. Drew (.240, 3 HR)
  • Andres Torres (.265, 1 HR, missed a month on the DL)
  • Aubrey Huff (.228, 4 HR)

There's no question that almost every year fans vote in an All Star starter who has no business being on the roster based on that year's production.  On one hand, that annoys me.  On the other, it's one of the only things fans can do that has a direct, tangible result on the field.  On the other, other hand, I do tend to get all snooty towards the fans who vote for players who don't belong.

The bottom line is, sorry @SFGiants.  I will not be voting an all San Francisco/Boston ticket.  And I'm pretty annoyed that you are encouraging ... no, let's call it what it is: enabling.  I'm annoyed that you're enabling poor voting practices, and encouraging fans to tow the company line.  It's time for the PR department to get a little "misfit" in them.

Get 'em Wilponzi

Dear Mr Wilpon...I agree-ish

It has been a long held idea that ownership shouldn’t criticize the players on its payroll. I think for the most part I agree with that tradition, but in the case of the recently printed feelings of Mets owner Fred Wilpon I am willing to make an exception. For the record I can't stand when players, coaches and managers call out others for under performing. Some things are just better left to our friends in the NBA, don't you think? Currently Wilpon is being sued by victims of the Madoff scam for the money they lost and he gained. This is an important context to keep in mind during this blog post. I am a firm believer in the importance of understanding where someone is coming from before judging their comments and feelings. He has remained relatively quiet throughout the ordeal, until now.

Beltran, Wright, & Reyes
Wilpon made some rather surprising comments about his three “star” players in a recent New Yorker article. Everything he said about Beltran, Wright and Reyes is true. Everything. Although true, these comments have the sharks of media in a feeding frenzy over the supposed blood in the water. I guess there is no room for honesty in the world of sports when someone’s ego is involved. Of course the media will make an exception for honesty whenever they are the self righteous ones delivering the necessary package of truth.

For me, one of baseball’s major issues is that contracts are based on past performance more than on future expectation. This is one of my biggest points of tension with the financial system of baseball. If you sign a player to a big contract (see Kevin Brown) you are stuck with whatever he does on the field without much recourse. You can get insurance for injuries, like the Braves did with Mike Hampton, but that is about it. In the NFL you can cut an under performing player and only be held responsible for a fraction of their salary. There are cases where that isn’t fair to the athlete, but the NFL is a more healthy business than the MLB, NBA and NHL. Baseball players say that they have earned the big contract, but a business man wants to hear “I will earn every penny you are going to pay me in the future.” Wilpon is a business man, he expects return on investment and he hasn’t gotten what he hoped from the “little” three. Here is my take on his comments by player.

Jose Reyes:
He called Jose Reyes a racehorse and injury prone. Jose Reyes signed for a lot of money in 2007 and for that investment got a couple of great years followed by diminished return due to injuries to his body and his injured commitment. Jose Reyes is going to seek monster money in the off season, and the Yankees will give it to him for sure because players with his speed are not common. Sadly though, you cannot argue that Reyes is a snagged spike on the infield or carelessly trimming a hang nail away from another trip to the DL. He has been an ok return on the investment, but Wilpon’s criticism was about his future value, not his past. There isn’t an educated baseball fan in the world that didn’t want Reyes in 07-08, and there isn’t an educated fan in the world that would sign him to a big contract now. He was/is banged up, but even while sitting around injured he collected his paycheck and never offered to return it. When young players rely on their legs for everything, and they incur a ton of injuries to them, the future is always in doubt. He never said he wasn’t a good player, just a dinged up one.

David Wright:
He said David Wright is a good kid and a good player but not a superstar. I am torn on this one. Wright is a fine player as evidenced by a 30/30 season, a 20/20 season and a career average over .300. I also know that he doesn’t strike a lot of fear into anyone. Anytime reports come out claiming that the park a hitter is playing in is “too big” for his power, you have a problem. As a rule, when your clean up hitter can’t muster the power to jack one out of his home field you have a serious problem (also keep in mind Wilpon signed black out Bay to an albatross deal). Would I take David Wright on my team…yes. Is he a superstar? No. If he didn’t play in New York he would be Mike Lowell.

Carlos Beltran:
This is what Wilpon got for 120 million.
Year
Tm
G
PA
AB
R
H
2B
3B
HR
RBI
SB
CS
BB
SO
BA
OBP
SLG
OPS
OPS+
2005-2011
NYM
785
3396
2930
511
818
192
15
142
518
97
16
411
511
.279
.366
.500
.867
127

This is an interesting stat line for comparison. This is the stat line of a man who made 23 million over 6 years for multiple clubs, but with comparative at bats. Care to guess who?
Year ▴
Tm
G
PA
AB
R
H
2B
3B
HR
RBI
SB
CS
BB
SO
BA
OBP
SLG
OPS
OPS+
2000-2006
Multi
815
3116
2805
434
726
158
20
152
469
110
38
252
714
.259
.325
.492
.817
108

I like Carlos Beltran, but he was a lousy return on investment. I am sure he is a good guy who plays with kids and has pet bunnies, but he is shell of himself. If you read the comments of Wilpon carefully you will see that he is ribbing his own stupidity more than making a criticism of Beltran. If Beltran wasn’t running at a low percentage of his previous self the baseball world wouldn’t be surprised by his solid start this season would they?

Let’s get back to the comments made by Wilpon. I personally think that athletes nowadays are paid so much money that the expectation of return should be intensified. I am so tired of the “fair market value" tag. If it is fair market value, based on future returns, then Beltran’s market value should be adjusted and he should be making a fraction of that contract. Wilpon is being sued by people who are angry that they were robbed and they are looking for someone to blame and make it fair for them. Their investments were poor ones and they want compensation. Wilpon was robbed of a lot of money by Beltran and Reyes, but who makes it fair for him? Selig? Please. I think as the owner you have the right to make any comments you want about your company and your investments. Players are investments in the same way new stadiums, logo designs, bobbleheads and foam fingers are an investment. Your goal is to have them bring a return worthy of what you paid for them. Beltran hasn’t done that. Reyes as shown a glimmer of it, but that star is fading. Wright has time to change that take, but it looks more and more everyday like he is just a really good player (which isn’t a bad thing at all). If they don’t like what Wilpon had to say they can go cry themselves to sleep in a giant bag of Wilpon’s, I mean Madoff’s, I mean Joe Investors, I mean someone else’s money. Money they didn’t earn.

Monday, May 23, 2011

Of Madoff and Mookie

Gabe:  So I'm reading this New Yorker article about Wilpon.  Did you know Preston Wilson is Mookie's son? (note: technically, step-son and nephew. yes, "and." seriously. look for yourself.)

Adam:  Ummmm no ... is Trevor his son too?
Mookie Wilson

Gabe:  No word on Trevor.  I will investigate.

Adam:  Maybe Trevor is the love child of Mookie and Ray Knight.

Gabe:  Ray Knight?  I think he looks more like Sid Fernandez.

Adam:  El Sid is definitely the male in that relationship.

Gabe:  Yep.  Sorry, Mookie.  Although it's easier to picture Sid pregnant.

Adam:  I read some of the article.  Didn't finish because of little league practice.

Gabe:  Priorities, dude.

Adam:  That's true.

Gabe:  Wilpon doesn't come across as a bad guy except for the couple of paragraphs where he ripped his best players.

Adam:  That's true.  I am on his side actually.  He's the owner ... not a manager.

Gabe:  Yeah, I am leaning that way, too.  Especially after I read that people "with small accounts—under five hundred thousand dollars" had their losses covered by insurance.  Not to excuse Madoff, of course, but I have a hard time feeling financial sympathy for millionaires.

Adam:  Me too ... I mean I am on his side about the players rippage too ...

Gabe:  Oh, I think he was accurate.  Just not smart to say that stuff publicly.

Adam:  19 homers already for the one year wonder.

Gabe:  Are we still talking about Preston Wilson?

Adam:  Last year was the year of the no-no ... this is the year of the 3-homer game.

Gabe:  But also the year of the pitcher: part deux?

Adam:  So when the pitchers are good ... they are really good ... when they are bad they are really bad?

Gabe:  I guess so.  Can I still blame expansion for diluting the pitching talent pool?

Adam:  Totally ... it's obvious pitching just hadn't caught up to bunting yet.

Gabe:  Do you think Jay Bell and Brett Butler are working on comebacks?  Y'know ... as the greatest bunters in history?

Adam:  Yeah they might be.  Or they are polishing their resumes for hitting coach jobs with Otis Nixon.

Brooks Conrad
Gabe:  Do you think Fredi Gonzalez has room for all 3 on his staff?

Adam:  Yeah ... we can fire Conrad and Uggla ... and just field 23 guys.

Gabe:  Good call.  Bell is probably still a better defensive 2B than Uggla.  And you're better than St. Conrad.

Adam:  Yep.

Saturday, May 21, 2011

Interleague Play: Selig's Finest Hour

In some ways, I'd say I'm a baseball purist. I don't like the Designated Hitter. I enjoy a good pitching duel. I don't believe ketchup has any place on a hot dog. Heck, I'd like to go back to the 154 game schedule. But I really like interleague play.

Say what you will about Mike Krukow and Duane Kuiper's homerness on Giants broadcasts, they're about a jillion times more objective and entertaining than Ray Fosse and whichever lesser Kuiper it is in the booth with him. They're terrible. But during last night's Giants/A's game, it was their turn for the local TV broadcast, and I toughed out a couple of innings before switching to the radio broadcast on my iPhone MLB At Bat app. The Lesser Kuiper (TLK) asked Fosse if he liked interleague play, and Ray responded with the expected negative perspective. It makes the All Star game less "special." It makes the World Series less compelling. Blah,blah, blah. I don't buy it.

I love the All Star game. I'm not a big fan of it deciding the World Series home team, but I love the game. How is it less interesting if Albert Pujols already faced Felix Hernandez ("F-Her"?) 3 times the month before? Maybe Pujols took him deep, or maybe he never touched the ball. Either way, doesn't that add to the drama as much or more than it detracts from it? I'm voting "yes." Yes it does.

And if you need a lack of familiarity between two teams to be excited about the World Flippin' Series, you should probably look inward to find the root cause of your apathy, not blame interleague play.

I like playing geographic rivals. I also like getting to see players from the other league, and how they stack up against my team. I like seeing the players and teams who aren't All Stars or the AL pennant winner. Now, sure, part of that is the twisted thrill I get watching anyone in their first at-bat against Tim Lincecum, but my enjoyment goes well beyond that. I like getting to see the other ballparks. I like the strategy that comes with having (or not having) the DH. I like seeing players adjust to new pickoff moves, outfield arms, and breaking balls.

The bottom line is that interleague play is FUN. I fully concede it creates some schedule issues and isn't a perfect system. But I like it. Bud Selig has done plenty of things that I don't like, and even some that I think are unethical to the point that he should have been removed from office, but I think he got it right with interleague play. And I sincerely hope that it's here to stay.

Friday, May 20, 2011

RIP Macho Man

Gabe: I just read that Macho Man Savage died in a car crash.

Adam: Today?

Gabe: Yeah, this morning in Tampa.

Adam: So maybe all those "judgement day" billboards were for Macho Man ... oooooohhhhhhhhhhh yeeaaaahhhhh ... listen here, Mean Gene.

Gabe: Did you know he played minor league ball with the Cardinals and Reds organizations?

Adam: So do you think it was Macho that introduced Canseco to the juice?

Gabe: It must have been. And he introduced Prince Fielder to Slim Jims.

Adam: Well played. I always wished he would have introduced me to Elizabeth.

Gabe: Ah, yes. Miss Elizabeth. But that might have changed the whole direction of your life.

Adam: Yeah, might have been me chewing on the turnbuckle instead of George The Animal Steele.

Gabe: Of course, then it might have been you introducing the cream and the clear to baseball instead of Canseco and his pals.

Gabe: But I'm fine with never having seen you in a singlet.

Thursday, May 19, 2011

Tiger and Earl

(I am about to speak ill of the dead, so you may want to look away)

I love Tiger Woods. I know that it is no longer PC to admit that in some circles. He has made some horrific mistakes of late, and now there is a rising tide of PED accusations about to over take him and his career. With all that in mind, I still love Tiger Woods. I have been listening to the talking heads of sports radio bash this new “soft” Tiger. This man who walks off the course mid round, can’t seem to overcome poor play early in tournaments and is in a seemingly endless downward spiral. They bash him constantly. For many in the media, he is just getting what was coming to him. That being said, I still love Tiger.

Lost in the stampede to crucify him is a dire lesson for all of us who have children. I have heard Tiger acknowledge his deep guilt over disappointing his father. I have heard the media talk about how his father taught him better than this. I have heard more homage paid to the memory of Earl Woods than the memory of Bobby Jones (not the Mets pitcher, although it is possible he is no longer with us and is worthy of some respect). Here is the equation society is using for explaining the descent of Tiger:

Tiger Woods - Earl Woods + Fame + Arrogance=Failure.

That equation leads me to believe that most people think that Earl was the force that steadied the rickety ship of Tiger. Without Earl Tiger would have never achieved anything close to what he has accomplished in his life. Earl was a steadying force in the life of Tiger, that is certain, but I am not sure the formula explaining the descent of Tiger shouldn’t look more like this:

Earl’s personality + Tiger’s personality = Inevitable Combustion

The stories that come out about the building of Tiger by Earl show an insane pattern of poor parenting. It is one thing to inspire and push your son, it is another to demand impossible perfection from him. Tiger was bound to snap. Before the collapse did you ever see Tiger relax? Did you ever see Tiger not be perfect? It wasn’t like he didn’t have his chances to expose his imperfection. Fuzzy Zoeller gave him a nice open door (See, told you), and all Tiger did was handle those racist comments with complete class. Vijay Singh’s caddy showed that there are plenty of classless people in the golf world, but Tiger wasn’t one of them. He handled his struggles, his victories and his competitors with complete class.

Let’s get back to Earl Woods and his parenting model. I believe that Earl Woods drove Tiger to this moment. He needed to break out from his father’s vicarious drive. The more we control our kids, the more outlandish and destructive their break out will be. Earl designed the perfect golfer, too bad he had to destroy his kid to do it. What I find most amazing is the capacity Tiger had for perfection. For most of us, having perfection demanded of us is a joke. For Tiger, it was nearly achieved. Tiger’s personality has brought undeserved credit to Earl’s parenting. Tiger’s ability, to not only absorb his Father’s ridiculous demands, but to live up to them, shows us all his tremendous capacity for greatness. It was that capacity Tiger had for greatness and Earl’s thirst for success that sent Tiger on a collision course with self destructiveness.

Now he has broken out from under that iron fist and the world knows he isn’t perfect. He hasn’t become comfortable with his imperfection the way John Daly has, and shouldn’t we be ok with that? The insanity of our culture is the measure of forgiveness we have for Daly (whose life has never been lived well), and the miniscule grace we offer Tiger (a man, who by all accounts has lived most of his life very well). A father has the power to guide and lead as well as the power to crush and control. The line is not as obvious as we would like to think it is. I believe Earl crossed the line and drove his son so deep inside himself, that the only way he would ever find his way out was to blast his way out. The last thing to be destroyed was the one thing Earl cared about most, Icon Tiger. Tiger was destroying himself privately for years, but to honor his father he kept the persona of Icon Tiger alive unscathed until that fateful night in Florida. Tiger hit that tree, but Earl was at the wheel.

I am in no way condoning the actions of Tiger, nor am I blaming his father for every one of his choices. I am not a person who makes it a habit to blame the parents for the sins of the child. I am writing this to just bring a little balance to the situation. Instead of looking for the “old Tiger” maybe we should be concerned with him finding out who that little boy was supposed to be 30 years ago? I know, I know, Tiger has a billion dollars to go find Tiger with. But can you really put a price on his lost soul? Here is the warning for all of us parents out there. So, your kid can swing a bat. Big deal. So, your kid has a sweet golf swing at 6 months old. Irrelevant. So your kid can play (name your vicarious sport of choice). Congratulations on the quality of your genetics. No matter what, never forget that the only gift is your child, not their talent. Encourage their dreams and help them build a fantastic future, but don’t force them to live the future you designed for them. Their success may not look anything like your success, but success it is nonetheless. I love Tiger Woods.

Tastelessly speaking ill of the dead,

Adam

Sunday, May 15, 2011

The Ballad of Kevin Frandsen (or: Why I Have A Double Standard About Steroids)

Kevin Frandsen has been suspended 50 games for violating baseball’s substance abuse policy. You can read more about the specifics here in the SJ Merc.

You remember Kevin, right? Bay Area kid, played at San Jose State, drafted by the Giants in 2004. He was one of the few who actually get an opportunity to play for the team they grew up rooting for. He was local, personable, hustled, and was quickly embraced by Giants fans. He even had his own fanclub, “Klub Kevin,” which as best as we can tell was two 19-year old girls, but still. They had their own myspace page and everything.

But even at his best, he was a borderline big leaguer. His 296 plate appearances in 2007 were a career high, seeing time at second, third, short, left, and right. He hit 5 homers that year, and had a slash line of .269/.331/.379. In 2008 he missed almost the whole season with an injury, then in 2009 went in to Spring Training as the favorite to win the second base job. He lost it to Emmanuel Burriss (who lost it to Juan Uribe, and then Freddy Sanchez). During Spring of 2010, he was traded to the Boston Red Sox in exchange for a bag of balls and an autographed picture of Carlos Quintana. They placed him on waivers at the end of April, and he was picked up by the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim, where he appeared in 54 games as a utility infielder. They let him walk after the season ended, he spent Spring 2011 with the Padres, who let him go before they broke camp, and he signed on with the Phillies organization, most recently playing all over the infield for the AAA Lehigh Valley IronPigs.

And now Frandsen has tested positive for Ritalinic acid, which is a banned substance under the “Minor League Drug Prevention and Treatment Program. “ Unless you have a prescription, which some players do. Ritalinic acid is a medication intended to treat ADHD. From other things I’ve read, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of players diagnosed with that particular affliction since this loophole opened. Of course some players, like Andres Torres, had already been diagnosed with ADHD and credit the medication with truly making a difference in their ability to focus, which I suppose is kind of important when you’re trying to distinguish between a 95 mile an hour fastball and an 80 mile an hour changeup. Beyond that, I don’t know what other advantage such a medication is supposed to create for a ballplayer, but clearly someone thinks it creates an unfair advantage and it is, clearly, against the rules. As someone diagnosed with ADHD (in my 30’s, to the surprise of no one), I have been on a couple of different medications, but I’m pretty sure none of them would have made me terribly effective standing in against Ubaldo Jimenez. Or even Ted Lilly.

The bottom line is that Frandsen was looking for an edge. The last time I “laced ‘em up” was in fourth grade little league (LMYA! ), so it’s hard for me to even imagine what it’s like to be the best player in your high school, excel in a division 1 college program, continue to have reasonable success through the minor leagues, and then not quite be good enough to stick in the majors. That has to be something a competitive guy is going to fight as long and as hard as he can. While I think spending 30 years coaching baseball at a Community College sounds like a charmed life, it may well sound like embracing failure to someone who is SO CLOSE to their dream of major league glory.

Probably the best, most honest thing I’ve ever heard a ballplayer say about performance enhancing drugs was in an interview with Padre Hall Of Famer Tony Gwynn, towards the end of his career. I think it was Bob Costas interviewing him, but I might be wrong about that. Gwynn was asked if he ever used steroids, and he said (something like) “I didn’t have to. “ He went on to explain that he had the physical and mental abilities to thrive in the big leagues, so it was never really a temptation for him. Then he said that he did not know what he would have done if he had been a fringe player. A borderline player. Somebody almost good enough to stick in the majors. If steroids had been the difference between San Diego and Tucson, $30,000 and $300,000 (or millions), he wasn’t sure he would have been able to resist the temptation to cheat. It would be hard to resist when you’re 22 and the majors are so close. I imagine it would be exponentially harder to resist when you’re 29, had a taste of big league life, and you see your window of opportunity rapidly closing. I’m not excusing the action, just saying that I understand some of what went into the decision Frandsen made.

And this is where I have a clear double standard. I have sympathy and forgiveness for Kevin Frandsen. And Armando Rios. And Marvin Benard. And Jeremy Giambi. And Juan Rincon. I get it. Like Tony Gwynn (the first and probably only time I’ll ever use that phrase in a sentence), I don’t know what I would have done if I’d been in their shoes. I’d like to think I would have just worked harder, but I’m a pretty big fan of shortcuts. While those players have been criticized and, in the more recent cases, penalized, I kind of get it.

Which is what absolutely infuriates me about Barry Bonds. And Sammy Sosa. And Mark McGwire. And Rafael Palmiero. And Roger Clemens. And Manny Ramirez. Each of those players had the talent to truly be an all-time great player without any performance being artificially enhanced. In fact, I think all of them probably would have had a legitimate shot at Cooperstown even if they hadn’t inflated their numbers and extended their careers through PED’s. Although I suppose that depends a little on when Big Mac and The Rocket started juicing.

Barry Bonds was on his way to becoming one of the 10 best players baseball has ever seen. Maybe top 5. He had 3 MVP awards before even the harshest critics think he started cheating. He would have been alone in the 400 homer, 400 stolen bases club, and may have gotten to 500+ in both categories. As he got older, he really did make some mechanical adjustments to his swing that helped him keep balls fair when he pulled them down the line, and his pitch selection was ridiculous. There are whole seasons where I don’t remember him checking his swing even once. He was surly and gruff and arrogant and had a sense of entitlement that I cannot stand. He was never my favorite player. I’m not even sure I could say I was a fan of his. But he was the best player on my favorite team for a long time. And that’s why it still infuriates me that he still felt like he had to get an edge. Now, sure, nobody will ever be able to quantify the extent to which PED’s made a difference in Barry’s game, or any of the other players who used them. Nobody knows how many juiced up pitchers Bonds faced in his career. Those are the reasons all the talk about asterisks and wiping the record book of their accomplishments cannot happen. But did those players, and many others, cheat to try to get an advantage? Yes they did.

Which brings us back to Kevin Frandsen. I don’t know if he has ADHD, “has” it, or just took the meds for whatever baseball-related aid they might provide. It doesn’t really matter. And I have zero objection to his being held to the letter of the law on this one. He did the crime, so he’ll do the time. Fair. But I don’t think he deserves the same scorn and alienation as those for whom the decision not to cheat should have been much easier.

And Kevin, if you’re looking for a good first base coach at that Junior College, well … I might be available.