Whose Line Is It Anyway: June 10, 2011

Look at the following career total stat line, and guess which player has those numbers.  Then leave your guess as a comment to this post.  First one with the right answer wins a custom desktop wallpaper featuring your favorite (non-dodger, non-o. smith) player, from any sport, built to the size of your screen.  Obviously, the "honor system" is at work here as far as not researching the answer.  You can submit more than one answer, but please make each guess a separate comment.  Come back every Friday for another game and chance to win!

Nobody guessed correctly last week, so we'll make it a little easier.  This week's player had an astounding 21 year Big League career, playing for 5 different franchises.
So ... whose line is this? (click to view larger image)

Hints: 

• 16 years in the AL, and 6 in the NL (so obviously a little overlap in there somewhere)
• During his 6 years in the NL, he had approximately 26,512 RBI against the Giants

Somebody is going to get this one pretty easily, so post your guess pronto!


Last week's answer after the jump:

Baseball's Best Nicknames

Adam: Hey look at the career of Chris Hoiles … why didn’t he have a job offer? Injury? Just hung them up? That’s a solid final year for a catcher. He had an OPS over 1.000 in ’93.

Chris Hoiles

Gabe: Those are definitely better numbers than I would have guessed. I have no idea why he stopped playing.

Adam: Yeah, I can’t remember either. Career OPS over .830 … nice.

Adam: One of McCann’s Baseball-Reference “most similar” players is “Bubbles Hargrave."  Ol’ Bubbles.

Gabe: That has got to be the worst baseball name ever.

Adam: And yes … Bubbles is Pinky Hargrave’s brother.

Gabe: Shut up. Neither of those are real.

Adam: Pinky was a lifetime .278 hitter … 39 bombs too. Bubbles was a lifetime .310 hitter.

Gabe: Still, though. I had an Uncle Pinky. He was a drummer. But how do you make it through years of team sports and still go by “Pinky?” Or “Bubbles?”

Adam: No idea. Pinky was a Brave for a bit, though.

Gabe: Pink doesn’t go with the Braves colors at all.

Adam: Bubbles spent most of his career with the Reds … was on the Yanks in 1930. I bet Babe Ruth had some fun with Bubbles.

Gabe: You’d have to think so. How many times do you think he heard “I know a stripper named Bubbles?”

Adam: Ruth probably knew more than one stripper named Bubbles. And Pinky.

Gabe: Yep. That’s a safe bet.

Adam: On the list of catchers similar to McCann there is a Bubbles … a Shanty a Babe and a Yogi. Catcher had to be the best nicknamed position right? (oh, and Ed Taubensee … which I am sure has McCann stoked)

Gabe: I’m sure. Spanky and Sluggo have got to be the best nicknames ever for teammates who played the same position.

Adam: Yeah, for sure … maybe we should do a top ten list of our favorite nicknames?

Just A Little Perspective

Aubrey Huff, one of the great clubhouse personalities of this generation, has saddled Giants rookie shortstop Brandon Crawford with the nickname "John Stamos."  Already, the hashtag #stamos gets plenty of run on Twitter during Giants games.

But Crawford is a young guy, and I found myself wondering whether or not he would even know who John Stamos is.  So I looked it up.  Brandon Crawford was born January 21, 1987.  Stamos' co-stars on Full House, Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen, were born June 13, 1986, roughly six months before Crawford.

Still, Huff isn't far off.  Also, I am old.

Mary Kate & Ashley Olsen, John Stamos

Brandon Crawford, "John Stamos"

Whose Line Is It Anyway: June 3, 2011

Look at the following career total stat line, and guess which player has those numbers.  Then leave your guess as a comment to this post.  First one with the right answer wins a custom desktop wallpaper featuring your favorite (non-dodger, non-o. smith) player, from any sport, built to the size of your screen.  Obviously, the "honor system" is at work here as far as not researching the answer.  You can submit more than one answer, but please make each guess a separate comment.  Come back every Friday for another game and chance to win!

This week's player had a 14 year Big League career, playing for 4 different franchises.
So ... whose line is this? (click to view larger image)

Hints: 

• He spent 8 years in the NL, and 6 years in the AL.
• He won 1 major award in his career, and was an All Star 3 times.

Old Sabean vs. New Sabean (who, technically, is older than Old Sabean)

I keep thinking I should have something poignant and compelling to say about Buster Posey's recent devastating, season ending injury, but every time I start typing I cry, wail, and gnash teeth until I fall asleep clutching my 1989 Starting Lineup Will Clark action figure.  So instead, you get this.

Brian Sabean is, at this moment, the longest tenured General Manager in baseball.  Anyone who holds that job for this long is going to have some wins and some losses.  And he has definitely done plenty of things right over the years.  But at times he has shown a tendency to do, well ... dumb things.  Like signing a 35 year old Dave Roberts for 3 years at over $15 million, or signing Neifi Pérez (for any amount of money).  Of course, his most notable missteps are the contracts he gave to Aaron Rowand (5 years and $60 million) and Barry Zito (7 years and $126 million).

Bill Neukom, Brian Sabean,
and The Trophy

The past couple of seasons, though, have seen Sabes (and I call him that because of how close we are, given all of the conversations we've had in my head) avoid the dumb move.  Not everything has worked out, of course, but nothing he's done lately has handicapped the team.  They have gotten very little for the $12 million they are paying Mark DeRosa over 2 years, but that's mostly due to injuries, and we're still talking about a small percentage of the payroll, and a relatively short amount of time.  It doesn't look like Miguel Tejada is going to be worth anywhere close to the $6.5 million the Giants will pay him this year, but at least it was a 1-year contract, and Sabean didn't feel like he had to top the dodgers' 3 year/$21 million offer to Juan Uribe.  Unless you're the Sonoma County Crushers, it's unlikely that a one-year contract is going to do any long term damage.  And it may be coincidence, but it seems like much of this change in Sabean's approach happened in conjunction with Bill Neukom ("Mr. Bowtie") taking over as the Giants managing partner.

So with the offense struggling, and now Posey - arguably their best position player - out for at least this season, I'm hoping we continue to see New Sabean at work.  With that, here are some headlines I hope I don't see in the near future.

"Giants Sign (Retired Catcher) To Replace Posey"  
Bengie Molina was, in Krukow-speak, a "good Giant."  No question about it.  And I'm sure Sabean and crew could have handled his trade more diplomatically, but they were going about the business of making the Giants the best team they could, and they definitely accomplished that.  But bringing him, or any other catcher sitting by their phone, is no guarantee of production beyond that what Eli Whiteside is offering, but will cost money and introduce an unknown variable into a pretty stable clubhouse.  Old Sabean would have panicked, and would have immediately been on the phone with everyone from Kirt Manwaring to Bobby Estalella.  Hopefully New Sabean doesn't hit the panic button quite that quickly.



"Giants Trade Top Prospects For Fading Veteran Catcher"
A trade in these circumstances is not necessarily a mistake, and may prove to be warranted in the near future, but I don't want to see the Giants give up legitimate talent for the hope that a veteran catcher who is underperforming elsewhere figures it out when he gets to AT&T Park.  Acquiring Ivan Rodriguez for a Double-A prospect we'll never hear from again and a box of sunflower seeds sounds great.  Trading Thomas Neal or Brandon Belt for 3 months of Pudge ... not so much.



"Giants Sign Clone Of Hall Of Fame Catcher"
Obviously there are ethical and political implications with this one, and I suppose it would have very little to do with either Old or New Sabean, but as a baseball fan ... this one isn't so bad.  I think I could live with this one.  When Posey comes back, I'm sure they'll figure something out.  Belt can play left, and Posey and Gibson can sort out who catches and who plays first base.


The bottom line is that I find myself with a degree of confidence that Sabes isn't going to do anything rash to solve the dilemma of the Giants losing their star catcher.  Go get someone if you have to, Brian. Just don't do anything dumb.

Time to outsource the NFL?

In honor of Fox televising the UEFA Champions League Final

match (and of course the utterly insane flopping that would make Vlade

proud), I thought I would talk about some major flopping going on here in the states. The NFL players union is flopping around on the floor crying foul as we speak. Yesterday, Drew Brees announced he has had enough of the owners and decided to air some grievances in public. Let me start by saying I don't care about the player’s gripes or the owner’s profits. I really don't care. I have tried to care, but I am unable to muster any concern for either side. I may be in the minority on the national level, but to be honest the only measure (albeit miniscule) of sympathy I have is with the owners.

Historically unions have served an important purpose in bringing some measure of equality to the workplace. The imbalance comes when unions demand so much of their employers that they find it easier to outsource to India than to deal with unions. I am sure that

no one in the states wants to see the NFL outsourced to India. You are a member of a union, because you are not wealthy enough to be the owner. It doesn’t matter how your particular owner got control of your team or business, all that matters is that they do in fact own it. Owners have the right to make profits without apologizing for it. As for unions, they always end up top heavy. Those running the union ask those at the bottom to risk everything while they themselves continue to make their money even in a time of layoffs and recession. So here we are, with Drew Brees running about the country on his righteous crusade seeking end the tyranny of those horrible NFL owners.

In case you missed it, here is what Drew Brees had to say. As you can see Drew Brees is convinced that ownership had the audacity to take advantage of Gene Upshaw’s death by pinning the leader-less billion dollar players union in the corner and bilking them for more money. While I don’t agree with Drew’s impossible theatrics, I can see how the players union was in a tough place after Upshaw’s death. It’s not like the players had the resources to hire a solid representative to look after their interests. They were sadly forced to accept a public defender from the district attorney’s office to try and get them a suspended sentence and public service.Wait…sorry I accidently turned the channel to Law and Order.Come on Drew. You are trying to tell us that the millionaire’s players club couldn’t secure decent legal representation on short notice? Let’s be real for a minute. The average guy who packs up his tools in the truck and shuffles off to a job every morning isn’t going to feel any sympathy for your misfortune, and here is why.

In 2009, the owners paid out 834 million dollars to players selected in the nfl draft’s first round. No, that is not a typo and yes you are reading that correctly. Those 32 players selected in the first round of the draft signed contracts and received signing bonuses totally over 800 million dollars. Of that amount $462 million is in guaranteed bonuses. Hey Drew, tell me again how it is the owners that are sucking the life out of the NFL. Drew Brees and the players union have somehow seen fit to be just fine with this imbalance and idiocy for years but suddenly they are trying to pin their own creation’s stupidity on the owners. Huh? Owners that are willing to dole out that kind of scratch for unproven commodities are obviously not unwilling to spend money.

I did some research on the pension plan offered by the NFL. Players receive between $3000 and $5000 annually per year in the league. So, my quick math skills tell me that if a player plays 5 years in the NFL he will receive between 15k and 30k annually. That may not seem like a ton of money, but the average income in the United States is just under 41k. So, if you take that total combined with a job at a fast food restaurant you find yourself smack dab in the middle of average. The NFL pension plan includes more that just money mind you. The NFL pension plan also includes medical coverage, research and care. You can read more about rule 88 and the Rozelle plan here. Last year there were a little over 3100 claims for annual pay outs from the pension fund.

I am not insensitive to the player’s plight here. I see how they might want to protect the retired players and offer them more income and coverage, as they themselves someday will have to live on their “meager” earnings. The players will tell you that the average career for an NFL athlete is less than 4 years in an attempt to garner your sympathy, but I just don’t see how that argument carries any weight. If you remove the 50 picks in the 6^th and 7^th rounds of every draft that play less than one year that average jumps up considerably. Also, aren’t we forgetting that their football talent should have gotten them a college degree that they can lean on after life in the NFL? If a player plays a couple of years, barring catastrophic injury, he should be more than capable of taking the money he earned, and coupling that with his college education he should have more than enough to build a great life with. Right? So what exactly is the NFL Players Union fighting for? Are they fighting for the athlete that was too foolish during their college tenure to actually learn in class? Or maybe the athlete that was too foolish to invest in their own retirement during a time in their life when they were making a ton of money? I am not sure exactly what they are fighting for beyond their own greed. Isn’t that exactly what those horrible owners are fighting for as well?

If you want me to believe that you care about those retired players, prove it. If the NFL Players are really a brotherhood, you can start by capping those ludicrous rookie salaries and use all of the extra money that the owners have proven they are willing to spend by putting it into the pension fund. Call it the Hello/Goodbye matching funds pension plan. For every dollar spent on the first round picks, a dollar is given to the pension fund. You could simply cap the first round at 400 million, that’s a paltry 13 per pick I know, and use the remaining 400 million for the pension fund over the life of the contracts. Also, you could take a percentage of all signing bonuses on all new NFL veterans contracts and put it into the pension fund. Plus, you could make paying into the pension fund a mandatory expense for all players who draw a salary in the NFL. If you, as the players, are unwilling to take these kinds of steps I have to believe that you are no better than every other union in the world. For every dollar you get the guy at the bottom you are pocketing five. You may start with the right ideas, but you end up with those at the top making all of the money and those at the bottom getting completely used as pawns in your game of greed. Last I checked Mr. Brees, you are at the top.

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.