ShysterBall Crashes The Hardball Times

Starting today, the daily "And That Happend" recaps are going to be available on the THT Daily page at The Hardball Times. No worries though: If you're the sort of person for whom THT makes you break out in hives as a result of mathaphobia, it will still be here as well. It's a win-win, really. I get to mooch off of their considerable traffic and prestige and they get, well, um, not a hell of a lot, actually. I guess I am prone to making the occasional obscure joke, and that has to count for something. Let's just call it win-charity, OK?

Going forward, I may very well be popping up with other things on THT from time to time as well. Not a ton, of course. They actually have, you know, writing standards and stuff, so unless and until I'm able to drop my cynicism and develop an attention span, those contributions may be sporadic at best. We'll see, though, and obviously I'll link to anything I do for THT here.

Some other things may be happening soon as well, but I'll leave that until they actually do. If I'm honest I worry about that sort of thing ["change bad! grunt, grunt, scratch"], and for that reason I really, really want you to let me know what, if anything, you think about any changes that happen around here. If I'm focusing too much on stuff you don't care about, let me know. If I'm being unfair to your team or your favorite player, tell me. If you liked me better back when I played folk songs and simply can't stand the electric stuff, feel free to call me Judas. I'm a big boy I can take it.

Ultimately I realize that nothing that will ever happen to me in the writing/baseball world would (will?) happen without the support and loyalty of the handful of people who started reading this site last year and who, for the most part, still form the vital core of the ShysterBall readership. I write this stuff for you guys (I'm aware of a handful of women too, but it's pretty much a sausage party around these parts, so forgive my use of the male pronoun). You know who you are.

Thanks,
Craig

The End of Futility

The Cubs have won nine straight and, while it's early, they have the look of a championship team. I didn't include any Cubs in my MVP analysis from yesterday because, in my mind, they look a lot like those mid-to-late 90s Yankees teams in which multiple players are performing at a high level and no one is truly bad. That's not good for MVP purposes, but it's great for a team's championship prospects. Derek Lee is going to slump, but Aramis Ramirez will be there to pick him up. Geovany Soto will catch a foul tip or something, but Kosuke Fukudome will go on a tear. So many weapons right now. The right manager. Maybe a little bit of magic. If you put a gun to my head today and asked me who will win the World Series, I'd tell you to put the gun away because I don't need to be under duress to pick the Cubs.

I'm not alone in thinking this, of course, and the other day George Vecsey became the latest of many to muse about Chicago breaking their 100 year championship drought. That has and will continue to be played to death so I won't dwell on it. Instead, I'm in the mood to jump ahead and wonder about what the world will look like after the Cubs win a championship, whether it be this year or not.

A whole cottage industry has sprung up around historic futility. There were scores of Red Sox books about their championship drought. It became such a mature market that, after 2004, the whole apparatus successfully shifted to a "Thank God the Red Sox Finally Won" footing and is now transforming into a "Red Sox: Team of Dominance" thing. The Cubs' sorrow-fest has been smaller and later to market, but it has been picking up steam like crazy in the wake of the centennial.

If the Cubs win it all, however, will there be any team to take their place? Will any club's exploits inspire a generation of sportswriters to spin tales of haplessness, snakebite, and woe? I'm dubious that anyone can match the Cubs and Red Sox in this regard -- both because of the extreme merits of their futility and because of the size and history of their fan base -- but here are the candidates all the same:

Indians

Last Championship: 1948

Historic Futility: Recent respectability notwithstanding, pretty damn high.

Near-Term Championship Prospects: Good, assuming they can pick up a bat or two.

Analysis: The sheer number of years since winning it all isn't dispositive in the futility analysis. Just ask the Red Sox who, despite having a ten-year shorter drought than Chicago, were able to milk much more sympathy out of it until 2004. That said, if the Cubs win the championship, Cleveland will have both the longest and probably the most pathetic stretch of championship-free baseball. There was a reason the movie Major League was set in Cleveland, and it wasn't because of tax breaks from the Ohio Film Office. Bonus for the Indians: they share a long-downtrodden city with two other historically snake bitten franchises in the Browns and Cavs, and all of that works together nicely when trying to frame a profile in sad sackery.


Giants

Last Championship: 1954

Historic Futility: Low. They've won more games than any franchise in baseball history, for crying out loud. And that's not solely a function of longevity: the Jints have five World Series titles and 20 pennants to their credit.

Near-Term Championship Prospects: Extraordinarily low, and will remain so as long as Brian Sabean remains at the helm, but that's fodder for another post.

Analysis: 54 years may be a lot, but no one is ever going to rally around the Giants as lovable losers. Too much winning has happened. Too many great players have passed through the clubhouse. Barring a cataclysmic earthquake or the outlawing of wireless Internet service, there is no possibility that the team's futility can be matched with some parallel storyline of the adversity faced by the team's home city. They need another 50 years or so to even make the conversation.


Astros

Last Championship: Never (team began play in 1962)

Historic Futility: Low. They've been to the playoffs nine times and have never lost 100 games.

Near-Term Championship Prospects: Pretty low. Their best players all over 30, and I'm not aware of any wave of young talent on the horizon.

Analysis: People don't think often about the Astros, but when they do, they tend not to think of them as losers. Since the early 70s, they've always at least pretended to be contending or on the verge of it, and when they have been truly bad, it hasn't lasted long.


Brewers

Last Championship: Never (team began play in 1969)

Historic Futility: Moderate. They've had 13 years over .500 and look to be on their way to a 14th. That's not too bad for an expansion team.

Near-Term Championship Prospects: Better than most teams can say. They have good young players. Give them an arm or two and they could easily win a championship in the next couple of years.

Analysis: There is a defined stretch of play that the Brewers can honestly refer to as their glory years (late 70s to early 90s), and that has to count for something in this kind of analysis.


Padres

Last Championship: Never (team began play in 1969)

Historic Futility: Moderate. Their lows have been lower than Milwaukee's and Houston's, but they do have 14 seasons at .500 or higher and a couple of pennants under their belt.

Near-Term Championship Prospects: It was thought to be high until the shooting started this year. They've got some decent young talent and a front office with a modicum of a clue, but man, it certainly went downhill fast this year, didn't it?

Analysis: San Diego has alternated between truly bad and respectable throughout its history. Like San Francisco, however, given where they play, I'm having a hard time featuring anyone getting all dramatic about the Padres woes. Sure, they may lose 100 games, but at the end of the day they can go out and eat fish tacos while watching the sun set over the Pacific Ocean. That's not the best backdrop upon which to properly project truly historic futility.


Rangers

Last Championship: Never (team began play in either 1961 or 1972, depending on whether you count the new Senators era)

Historic Futility: Pretty high. Three relatively recent division titles help Rangers' fans feel better about things, but they have only won as many as 90 games three times in their history.

Near-Term Championship Prospects: I suppose they could catch some run-bashing lightning in a bottle with Hamilton, Young, Kinsler, and Bradley, but they really don't have the pitching, and those guys are all going to be too old once they get some (if they ever do).

Analysis: The Rangers' story would be a lot more compelling if (a) they had decided to embrace the Washington Senators' legacy from the outset; and (b) they didn't play in football country. In light of those things, however, they'd have to string together many 100 loss seasons -- or a series of near-misses -- before anybody decided to romanticize their futility.


Mariners

Last Championship: Never (team began play in 1977)

Historic Futility: High. Seattle didn't have a winning season in its first fourteen years, and didn't make the playoffs until year nineteen. Despite strong play in the mid-to-late 90s, those teams are more remembered for squandering an outrageous amount of talent than they are for winning a couple of division crowns.

Near-Term Championship Prospects: Low. There was some unwarranted optimism recently, but this is an old team, with only one or two guys who are likely to play for the next contending Mariners squad.

Analysis: As a relatively new team it will take more time, of course, but the Mariners are an excellent candidate for becoming folk losers. And it could go either way, really: they could lose and lose for 100 years and become Cubs-style sad sacks. Or, in light of all of those missed opportunities of the Griffey-Rodriguez-Martinez-Johnson years, they could come close to a couple of championships and lose and become the next Boston Red Sox. The Indians are still my favorites, of course, but if they manage to get a trophy sometime soon, Seattle is my dark horse candidate.


Pirates

Last Championship: 1979

Historic Futility: Not as high as you might think. Yes, they've been pathetic for about 15 years now, but with the exception of a couple of years in the mid-80s, the Pirates were consistently good -- and often great -- between the time Danny Murtaugh took over in 1958 and the time Barry Bonds left in 1993.

Near-Term Championship Prospects: Pretty low, but with a new, progressive front office in place things may, at long last, be looking up.

Analysis: It's been a rough road for a long time, but the Pirates have won seven division titles and three World Championships in the living memory of the Baby Boomers, and that's not going to get anybody writing books about your futility.


Others:

No team that has won a championship since 1990 has a legitimate claim. There are seven teams whose last championship came in the 80s: the Phillies, Orioles, Tigers, Royals, Mets, Dodgers, and A's. While the Royals stick out in that group as the team with the greatest claim to sympathetic loserdom, anybody above the age of 30 or so still vividly recalls them being considered the class of the American League. For my part, no matter how many times I see them lose, I still think of George Brett, Hal McRae, Dan Quisenberry, and Willie Wilson, so I can't yet come around to giving them the Cubs treatment.

UPDATE: Commenter Rob noted that it wouldn't be a good idea to underestimate the Phillies. I think he's right. 1980 and a couple of pieces of secondary hardware since notwithstanding, I think they may have the best claim, eventually anyway, to this crown. Philadelphians are a passionate people, prone to overreacting and pessimism. They're good right now, but that other stuff, combined with the 10,000 loss thing and the historic run of awfulness between the 1920s and the 1950s, may shoot them up the list fast if and when they experience a moderate stretch of bad play.

Conclusion:

The Indians are the clear crown princes of futility, standing ready for their coronation should the Cubs finally put it all together this year. And there really isn't a close second. Seattle is very green as far as these things go, but they're my Prince Henry. After that we're left with a lot of unsatisfying choices, but I suppose either Texas or San Diego will do its best to fill the role. Ultimately, though, I feel that we're nearing the end of an era. There will never be another insane phenomenon like the self-flagellation of Red Sox fans, and I'd be shocked if a team ever went 100 years without a championship again.

Sadly, I will probably see the end of the lovable loser meme in my lifetime. Hopefully it holds out until I can land my first book contract.


UPDATE: Being the complete idiot I am, I forgot to include the Nats! Let's fix that:

Nationals

Last Championship: Never (team began play in, well, that's complicated; see below)

Historic Futility: High, but again, see below.

Near-Term Championship Prospects: Well, on the one side we have slim, and the other hand we have none. Given their team-building plan, however, I suspect that the only chance they have is if the Reds win a championship and start casting off really, really good players, thereby allowing Jim Bowden to snap them up.

Analysis: The team's choice to turn its back on the history of the Expos is pretty sad, so I will not allow them to count Montreal's history for these purposes. If they did, though? Montreal had its highs: four 90-win seasons and one more that could have been 100 wins and a championship given how they were playing when the strike hit. But it also had its lows: seasons with 107 and 110 losses, many other seasons in which the team were basically dead men walking, even if they overachieved a bit.

Ultimately, though, they don't rate highly in the historic futility race, because unlike Chicago, Boston, and even Cleveland, they simply didn't have a fan base that would support them through the bad times. Yes, I know that there is this whole meme out there about how much Montreal loved its Expos and would have continued to do so had it not been for the evil Jeff Loria, but I'm not really buying it. Montreal fans were like the fans of a lot of teams: they showed up when the team was good, they didn't when the team was bad, and they never really lived or died either way. That, to me, isn't the stuff of legendary futility. That's just futility.

Final Curtain

Smoltz to have season-ending surgery. I presume that this is the end of the line.

I am genuinely sad as I type this. It's like losing a thoroughbred mid-race. I don't wanna talk to nobody about nothin' for like three hours.

(thanks to Jason at IIATMS for the link)

God, I Love Baseball

Back in the 80s, when TBS cameramen would focus on a comely lass in the stands, Skip Caray would say something like "well, hello ladies!" and make little effort to hide the fact that he enjoyed gawking. These days, as ShysterBall reader and Halos fan extraordinaire Daniel Flude, notes, broadcasters are conditioned to reign that sort of thing in. Well, at least they try to:

You may be familiar with the broadcast stylings of Rex Hudler, the Wonder Dog, who does color commentary for the Angels and Fox's Saturday games. If you're not familiar with him, his commentary is similar to his playing style: fun and passionate, but all over the place and without much substance. He's known best for coining Hudlerisms, which are his silly way of describing normal baseball occurrences (e.g. he called Francisco Rodriguez K-riffic tonight after a strikeout, and one of his favorites is "John Lackey, keepin' it on tracky").

Well, he and Steve Physioc, the play-by-play guy, were promoting an upcoming Angels giveaway. They were describing this woven beach mat, which was being demonstrated by an attractive young woman in a tight shirt and short shorts. The woman proceeds to show us how the mat should be used, lying down on it in a rather suggestive pose, upon which Rex remarks loudly, "Wow, would you look at that!" There's a moment of hesitation before Rex adds, "...MAT. Look at that MAT. And that surfboard, isn't that surfboard great?"

Physioc is laughing hysterically and Rex is backpedaling at the speed of light, even commenting on how dirty the surfboard is, trying desperately to divert our attention from his ogling of the young woman. I can't remember the last time I laughed that hard during a baseball game.

God, I love baseball.

I need to watch more west coast games.

And That Happened

Blue Jays 9, Yankees 3: How should a Yankee fan feel the morning after Joba Chamberlain walked four guys and couldn't make it out of the third inning in his much hyped debut? On the one hand, Henry Ward Beecher once said "one's best success comes after their greatest disappointments," so perhaps optimism is in order. On the other hand, Thomas Hardy once said "the sudden disappointment of a hope leaves a scar which the ultimate fulfillment of that hope never entirely removes." I love Hardy and respect Beecher, but I'm going to have to go with the Post for philosophical guidance on this one: "Joba is stopped for Jay-Walking."

Mets 9, Giants 6: Pedro has always been good on 62 days rest. 6 IP, 3 H, 3 ER is about as much as could be expected from him, so the Mets have to be pleased. The 2-3 with an RBI single was just gravy. Barry Zito (4.1 IP, 7 H, 6 R, 5 BB, 1 K, zero velocity) continues to be the world's most expensive batting practice pitcher.

Phillies 3, Reds 2: Someone found Jay Bruce's kryptonite. Well, relatively speaking, anyway: he only got on base in half of his plate appearances, sending that OBP plummeting from .667 to .649 and lowering his slugging percentage to triple digits. So, yeah, I guess the league has figured him out. In other news, Dusty sat Griffey again. One suspects that he'll play sparingly between now and the end of the current road trip in order to maximize the possibility that he'll hit #600 at home. That seems silly to me. I mean, there are six games left on this road trip. Given how things have gone for him so far this season, Griffey is going to need at least 15-20 more games in order to hit that dinger, so there's no need to worry.

Astros 2, Pirates 0: I haven't thought much about the Astros this season, so I spent a few minutes looking at their roster and stats. Quite the catching combination they have going there at the moment. J.R. Towles: .145/.270/.282; Brad Ausmus: .178/.187/.260. They have to be on pace to become least productive catching duo in baseball history, right?

Red Sox 7, Rays 4: The Sox begin the Ortizless portion of their season with the uber-D alignment: outfield of Drew, Crisp, and Ellsbury, with Manny at DH. I think that's how I'd do it to. At least until I thought Manny was becoming even more distracted than he usually is as a result of all the down time, then I'd send him out to left and let Casey DH once or twice.

Brewers 7, Diamondbacks 1: The day after moaning about playing time and (maybe) demanding a trade, Bill Hall gets the start at third base. Not that anyone cared about his complaining -- it was simply a matter of a lefty on the hill. Seth McClung beat Randy Johnson. McClung is better suited than most to overcome the intimidation that accompanies facing the Big Unit. Like me, McClung is from the great state of West Virginia. He spent his entire childhood beating dudes with mullets.

Braves 5, Marlins 4: Maybe Atlanta has turned a corner or something, because this is the kind of game that they've lost just about every time this year. Down by a run after coughing up an early lead and going into what Mac Thomason calls "hibernation mode" for six innings, I would have bet my son's teddy bear that the Braves were going to lose it. Eighth inning rolls around, however, and its single-double-double-lead, with Soriano sending the Fish out 1-2-3 in the ninth. Wait -- I'm going to check and see that the team names weren't reversed in the box score. I'll be damned.

White Sox 9, Royals 5: Yesterday Neyer sarcastically mused that maybe Guillen's tirade was calculated. He immediately dismissed that notion, and was probably right to do so. But you know, maybe we should give it a bit more thought. After all, Guillen knew that he was going back to his home park to face the team playing the worst baseball in the league right now. He knew that, after giving his 15 HR-hitting, 50 RBI-driving in left fielder Sunday off, he'd be returning Quentin to the lineup last night. Maybe he knew a win was around the corner and he wanted to make himself look like a motivational genius? Yeah, calling out Kenny Williams like that was probably a bridge too far, but I actually like Guillen for some absurd reason, and I think everybody is being too hard on him. By the way: Kenny didn't do anything and apart from starting Quentin, it was nothing but some minor flip flops.

Rangers 12, Indians 7: That's the second crisp and clean game between these two finely-honed blades in as many nights. Coming in at a brisk 3:48 and featuring 31 hits and eight walks, this is one to tape and play back at the little league clinic next spring. One of those walks, by the way, was an intentional one to Josh Hamilton in the bottom of the second inning. Amazingly, that's the first intentional walk he's received all season.

A's 5, Tigers 4: Dontrelle Willis returns to the rotation. The good: 4 IP, 2 H, 0 ER. The bad: 5 BB. The ugly: Pitchers for both teams combined for 22 walks.

Angels 5, Mariners 4: Joe Saunders ups his record to 9-2, exceeding his career-high win total on June 3rd. The Angels have a 3.5 game lead over Oakland. The Cubs and Diamondbacks have the same lead on their nearest opponents, but really, doesn't the Angels' lead seem safer to you than the others? In other news, Richie Sexson's new stance doesn't change a thing (0-4, 2K).

Rockies 3, Dodgers 0: Fisticuffsmanship! Well, more like a turgid wrestling match, as Matt Kemp starts shoving Yorvit Torrealba, who shoved back and, well, you know how those things go. Double ejections and some video that will dominate SportsCenter while no attention is paid to Jeff Francis' 7 IP, 4 H, 0 ER performance.

Cubs 9, Padres 6: It's June. No swoon?

Orioles 5, Twins 3: Radhames Liz makes his first start of the year. I don't know much about him and have never seen him, but from what I've read, this guy is supposed to be a beast. Raw, to be sure, but with high 90s gas (he was "only" at 94 or so last night) you can get away with a lot. Fun fact from his Wikipedia page: "Early in his professional career, Liz received attention because of a clicking sound which is sometimes loud enough to be heard in the stands and occurs whenever he throws a pitch. Some have thought it to be his thumb clicking against his index finger. Oriole's head athletic trainer Richie Bancells discovered that Liz's scapula caused the clicking." Will Carroll has been asked to carry his cell phone with him and remain on alert at all times during Liz's starts this year.

Cardinals 6, Nats 1: The rain delays lasted longer (2:40) than the actual time it took to play the game (2:27). The Cards weren't happy with how long it took the DC crew to get the field covered and uncovered after the dealys. Kyle Lohse: "I don't want to get down on the grounds crew, but maybe they could tighten up a little bit next time." Oh, snap!

Pestilence v. Comcast

Cubs fans go a century without winning a World Series, but after a mere 60 games of success they're getting all uppity and litigious. From the complaint:

7. Kerry Wood is the Chicago Cubs closer who relieved Carlos Marmol. Wood also hung the slider that Michael Barrett hit for a warning track flyball.

8. The Unnamed Comcast Cameraman filmed the 9th inning of said game. This cameraman willfully filmed a much higher trajectory of the flyball than was necessary. Due to this high trajectory camera angle, hundreds of thousands of Cubs fans were momentarily led to panic as they assumed Michael Barrett's warning track flyball was indeed of home run distance sufficient to reach the Western Metal Supply Co. warehouse far beyond the left field fence.

9. The Unnamed Comcast producer chose to use the unnamed cameraman's feed of the flyball. This decision contributed to the heart attack suffered by Cubs fans everywhere.

10. Len Kasper and Bob Brenly are the Comcast announcers who emphasized the unnecessary drama by not reassuring viewers early enough that the baseball would remain within the confines of the playing field.

I suggest an immediate motion to dismiss based on the plaintiff's failure to allege the existence of a duty. If that doesn't work, the defense should argue that anyone allowing themselves to get so emotionally tied up with the Cubs has assumed the risk.

(thanks to reader Chris Heer for the link)

Utley For MVP?

Justin Sablich at the New York Times' Bats Blog is among many noting Chase Utley's recent domination:

The Phillies second baseman took home National League Player of the Week honors last week for his five home runs, he is leading the N.L. in all-star votes, and is even considered to be one of the fittest men in America, according to Men’s Fitness magazine . . .

. . . If current trends continue, Utley will be in the mix for the N.L. Most Valuable Player award. And if he fights off Houston’s Lance Berkman for the honor, Utley would be the third different Phillie in three years to win the award, a feat last accomplished by the Yankees when Roger Maris, Mickey Mantle and Elston Howard earned honors from 1961 through 1963.

I think Sablich is forgetting a couple of guys. Like the chap currently hitting .400 for the Braves. Or the man single-elbowedly carrying the Cardinals. Or even the vitamin water mogul up I-95. Not that Utley isn't deserving, because he's having a transcendent season. But the fact remains that there are multiple attractive MVP candidates in the NL thus far.

Keeping in mind that it's obnoxiously early to even begin thinking about this stuff -- and keeping in mind that this isn't what I think should happen but, rather, what will happen -- I think it's going to break down something like this:

A) In the exceedingly unlikely event Chipper hits .400 for the year, everyone else can go home because they'll give it to him no matter what happens to the Braves. Yes, I realize that .400 hasn't always been a lock for the MVP, but I think it would be the case this year unless Utley hits in 57 straight games or something;

B) If Chipper hits .399 or lower, the MVP will go to the whichever of the glamor boy infielders plays for the team that happens to win of the NL East. Yes, that includes even David Wright, whose stats thus far pale compared to that of Utley and Jones, but who will probably be credited for leading the Mets back from the late May brink, even if the brink wasn't all that treacherous to begin with. Sure, the Marlins could still pull it out, but let's be honest here and admit that Dan Uggla and Hanley Ramirez need not apply;

C) Pujols muscles into the conversation if and only if the Cardinals win the division or stay in a close race to the very end. He may be the most "valuable" guy to his given team, but with all of the fireworks in the East, he's just not going to get the press and attention he's properly owed absent some "carrying his team to glory" storyline. He's not a lock if the Cards win the division, but if they do he trumps a division winning Wright, I think, and probably trumps a division winning Jones if he's south of .350 or misses a chunk of games. Barring injury or dramatic falloff, Utley probably trumps Pujols.

D) Berkman is better than all of them this year, but unless he breaks a record or something (like, say, the record for drag bunt singles by a guy who slugs .750) he won't win it either because the Astros probably aren't going to be a part of the playoff picture.

E) Wild card: Phillies Phatigue. After Howard and Rollins, are the writers really going to give it to another Phillie? I don't think the writers have truly caught on to how much of a bandbox Citizens Bank Park is yet -- as I mentioned this morning, 30 of Utley's last 43 homers have come at home -- but this isn't like all those Dodgers winning rookie of the year awards, and some writers may have a vague sense that someone outside of Philadelphia deserves it. Probably not though.

Odds are Vegas Watch's game, so allow me to simply set forth my partially-posteriorly derived list of probability in order of most to least likely to take home the hardware:

Utley

Jones

Pujols

Wright

Berkman

Thoughts?

Let it die, Moises

Moises Alou plays with Steve Bartman's emotions like a puppet on a string.

Not Gonna Happen and Shouldn't

I haven't seen any columnist or blogger come out and say it yet, but in the wake of the Ortiz injury, there are signs and portents that a "sign Barry Bonds" feeling is starting to rumble within the depths of Red Sox Nation. Setting aside the fact that the Red Sox' very own Senior Baseball Operations Advior publicly counseled against signing Barry Bonds a mere week ago, Art Martone of the Projo SoxBlog tells Red Sox Nation to chill:

Signing Barry Bonds right now, at this moment, is a panic move and we've seen here panic moves have gotten the Red Sox in the past. It led them to trade Josh Bard and Cla Meredith for Doug Mirabelli. It led them to bring in (the other) Javy Lopez as a backup catcher. One of the best things about the last two years is that the team has built such organizational depth that it's lessened the need for panic moves . . .

. . . Maybe it'll all change. Maybe two weeks of Sean Casey as DH, or of an everyday outfield of Jacoby Ellsbury, Coco Crisp and J.D. Drew (with Ramirez as the DH), will demonstrate the need for more offense. Maybe the news on Ortiz will get worse, and the team will decide it needs to find another big bat. Maybe, maybe, maybe.

Don't make decisions based on maybes. It's June 3. There's plenty of time to decide what the right path should be. Right now, Barry Bonds shouldn't be on that path.

I agree with Art. The Red Sox are only a game and a half back. It's not the time for desperate measures. They should rotate Casey and Ramirez through there for a while and see what they've got. If a month goes by and it appears that Papi is out for the season, reassess. There will be a lot more available guys out there by then -- Adam Dunn? -- and many of them will be better options than Barry Bonds.

As I and many others have said in the past, the biggest thing anyone has to worry about with respect to a Bonds signing is a fan revolt and the intense scrutiny the front office would be subjected to in the event Bonds falls on his face (which is very possible).

With the exception of the Bronx, I can't imagine those things being more likely to occur anywhere else than in Boston. Theo has tons of goodwill on his side, but the same could have been said in 2005, and he left Fenway at the end of that moderately tumultuous season (a) having resigned; and (b) wearing a gorilla suit.

In other words, it's a stressful job, and my guess is that he doesn't need any more of it.

Feel The Love

IIATMS really hates Kyle Farnsworth:

Every now and then, I take a peek around the Statcounter "keyword analysis" to see how some of you guys find me, if not from a link elsewhere. Right now, the number one search criteria (over the last 2 weeks or so) that brought you guys here is "I hate Kyle Farnsworth". Congrats, guys. There's lotsa room in the pool, c'mon in! Oh yeah, there was one who searched "kyle farnsworth sucks", too. Feel free to identify yourselves!

As a result of this well-dispersed dislike for Farnsworthless, I created the following group on Yahoo! Groups: I Hate Kyle Farnsworth. Please come and join.

The two most popular search terms in ShysterBall history are "Andruw Jones Fat" and "Debbie Clemens Tits" (and yes, I realize that I just compounded the problem).

I don't think I'm going to be setting up any Yahoo! Groups about those things.

Really?

Bill Hall has asked for a trade. Fine, I really don't care. This is not the NBA or NFL, he can ask all he wants. What struck me from the article was this:

Hall, 28, filled in for injured shortstop J.J. Hardy in 2006 and had his best season, slugging 35 homers and driving in 85 runs, earning team MVP honors. After agreeing to move to centerfield last year, Hall was given a four-year, $24 million contract, at the time the biggest deal in club history for an everyday player.

Obviously that has been surpassed by Braun -- and Sheets and Suppan have larger deals -- but I was rather surprised to realize that as of 2006, Milwaukee had never committed more than $24M to an everyday player. That hasn't been a really tremendous number for some time now.

Papi's Wrist

David Ortiz is out a month and could miss the whole season due to tendon sheath damage in his wrist. This is scary stuff. Nomar had wrist surgery back when he was good, and then he was never good again. Ken Caminiti was having his last good season before a ruptured tendon sheath ended it and basically his career.

Well, in Caminiti's case the tendon sheath had a lot of help from all of that crack and alcohol, but his swing was pretty much toast after that too.

And That Happened

Indians 13, Rangers 9: This game was available in HD at Chez Shyster last night, but I didn't watch it. Sure, I tuned in to the beginning, but seeing how nice a night it was out, I decided to take a walk instead. I went a couple of miles down the country lane out of my little village, cut through a nearby cornfield, and spent some time watching the beautiful Midwestern sunset while throwing rocks in a pond. When I came back, I mixed Mrs. Shyster and I a couple of scotch and sodas, sat down, and watched an hour and a half documentary about Las Vegas. Then I got up, sat down at the computer and returned a couple of emails. I was pretty tired at this point, but for some reason I went back into the living room, flipped some channels, and I'll be damned if the game wasn't still going on. Know what? For as much as I love baseball, I think I made the right choices last night.

Braves 7, Marlins 5: Smoltz comes back and immediately blows his first save opportunity (1 IP, 3 H, 2 ER). It took a wild pitch by Marlins' closer Kevin Gregg in the bottom of the ninth to get him and the Braves off the hook, and a Yunel Escobar homer in the 10th won it for Atlanta. I told you I couldn't watch.

Phillies 5, Reds 4: Jay Bruce was awesome again (2-4, HR, RBI) but Chase Utley was awesomer (3-4, HR, 2 RBI), homering in his fifth straight game. I think Utley is fantastic and everything, but it's worth noting that 16 of his 21 home runs have come at home this year, and he's over .200 points of OPS better there too. Last year, it was 14 of 22 at home. It's not like Citizens Bank is Coors east -- Ryan Howard hits 'em out at a fairly even clip at home and on the road -- but Utley seems to be particularly fond of the joint.

In other news, Ken Griffey, Jr. gets a night off. My buddy Mark -- a raging Reds fan -- sat in my office yesterday afternoon musing that Griffey is the most famous zero-tools player of all time. "He can't throw. He can't get to any balls in right. He has no speed or base running skills at all. He can't catch up to anything, and while he's going to get to 600 homers eventually, he'll never see 610." While I'm not as pessimistic about Griffey as Mark is -- I'm not a Reds fan after all, so I'm not as invested -- I find myself hoping that he'll pull a Mike Schmidt and retire the morning after he hits 600. It'll be a nice round number. He'll be able to claim that he went out on his own terms, even if it's not entirely true. His Hall of Fame case and legacy will be unchanged no matter what he does, and by bowing out midseason it will spare him and everybody else the spectacle of a sympathy trade to Seattle later this year when he'll be talked up as a solution to their DH problems, but in reality will be nothing more than a sideshow freak. C'mon Ken. Do it. Hit 600 and ride off into the sunset!

Orioles 6, Red Sox 3: It might have been a good night for one of those two-inning saves from Papelbon. As it was, Okajima coughed up four in the eighth and it was good night Irene.

Twins 6, Yankees 5: Livan Hernandez gives up 13 hits and a walk and the Yankees only score five runs off of him. Meanwhile, the Farnsworth-pitches-the-eighth-inning plan has begun without a hitch (1 IP, 3 H, BB, 1 ER, bacon saved by a caught stealing, but gets the loss anyway). All I know is, Joba had better pitch well tonight or else there will be a lot of second guessing in the New York papers. Wait, what am I saying? Joba could pitch a 27 strikeout perfect game and there would be a lot of second guessing. This is New York we're talking about.

Pirates 5, Cardinals 4: 57 games into the season, and Pittsburgh is sitting at 27-30. That's three games better than they were at this point last year. It's six games better than they were at this point in 2006. Do you know what that means? It means that by 2011 the Pirates stand a decent statistical chance of leading the division 57 games into the season!

Brewers 4, Diamondbacks 3: Dre -- I know they lost, but I don't want to hear you complaining about the Dbacks anymore. I mean, they've lost seven of ten, and in that time have actually gained a game on the Dodgers. For as bad as they've been lately, the West is so terrible this year that I'm having a difficult time imagining Arizona blowing this.

Cubs 7, Padres 6: Chicago begins the portion of their schedule with a BUNCH of road games (12 of their next 15; 22 of their next 31). So far, so good. Bonus: Piniella kept his promise to shorten Zambrano after last Wednesday's 130 pitch outing.

A's 3, Tigers 2: Late inning heroics by Bobby Crosby seal the deal. The A's are kind of a 1960s team, aren't they? Sac flies, RBI singles, and guys who are nowhere near the lead lead in most hitting categories, but aren't so low that they'll kill you. Well, catcher (Kurt Suzuki, 80 OPS+) and first base (Daric Barton, 87) ain't helpin', but you get the idea.

Giants 10, Mets 2: Nothing like giving your team one-third of an inning to start a week-long road trip in style! Perez: 0.1 IP, 5 H, 2 BB, 6 ER. About as heroic a turn a long man can give you from Claudio Vargas (4.2 IP, 0 ER) is the only thing that saved the bullpen for the next couple of days.

Agent Ethics

Jason at IIATMS smells something fishy in Josh Hamilton's dealings with his agents. Here's the relevant bit from the Sports Illustrated article he quotes:

Josh Hamilton's negotiations for a long-term deal may be held up a little by his decision to switch agents during negotiations that appeared to be progressing. Hamilton, a born-again Christian after returning from bouts with his drug addiction, explained to friends that he wanted to be with a Christian stable, so he switched agents from Matt Sosnick to Michael Moye as he seemed to be closing in on a long contract.

Jason's take -- which you should click through to read by the way -- is one of concern for the agent being thrown aside. He asks: "Is it a shady/unfair move to dump your longtime agent as you're about to sign a big, long-term contract solely due to his religion?"

My view is that religion shouldn't enter the ethics equation here, but yeah, I agree that there is a reason for concern. Based on the article anyway, it appears as though the agent bringing the deal most of the way home is getting cut out as someone else swoops in at the last second. I would hope that if that's really how it happened, agent #1 gets an appropriate cut of commissions. That's how it works, right?

At least I hope that's how it works. I'd hate to think that there are people out there more unethical than nasty old lawyers like me.

Reminder: I want your pics

You may have missed it due to the rare weekend post, but I have something of a contest/art project going on. Full details here, but this is the upshot:

In order to help my buddy's very cool events finder, Zvents, circumvent MLB's draconian policing of its copyrights, I am asking ShysterBall readers to send in pics that they have taken of their favorite major league team and/or its ballpark.

The pics will be used to accompany Zvents game listings, as well as the Zvents powered listings that can be found in hundreds of local newspaper sites like this one in the Boston Globe and other major papers.

The pics (a) should be a good representation of your team and/or its ballpark; (b) should have been taken by you; and (c) should not contain any copyrighted material like logos. They need to be 1MB or large JPG.

The best photo wins $100 and a Zvents t-shirt. The second best gets a t-shirt. The third best gets steak knives.*

Again, go here for full details, then go to the ballpark with your camera and send in the best you can find.



*Steak knives subject to availability. I currently have no available steak knives.

Ensberg DFA'd

For the second time in less than a year, Morgan Ensberg has been designated for assignment.

There was loose talk in the comments last winter that putting Ensberg at 1B and allowing Giambi to DH was the best move in that it would provide a more reliable glove to back up the fragile, eggshell minds of the Yankees' young pitching trio. No amount of leather, however, was going to overcome .203/.263/.243 and Girardi has obviously had no interest in playing him since A-Rod came back.

It seems like 100 years ago now, but Ensberg posted a .283/.388/.557 in 2005 and was fourth in the MVP balloting. It's a long drop from age 29 to 32.

UPDATE: I hadn't seen it when I posted a few minutes ago, but reader Jacob alerted me to the fact that Posnanski went on an extended riff about early-30s decline in his Banny Blog post this morning. As an almost 35 year-old man nursing a sore back this afternoon, I hear him loud and clear.

God, I Love Baseball

From reader Cooker, first posted in the comments section of this morning's recaps:

Friday nights Red Sox-Orioles game, home plate umpire gives the full, dramatic strike three call against Coco Crisp. The only problem is that it is only strike two, leaving the umpire with a little egg on his face. Coco almost gets run when he tells the umpire: "and it still wasn't a strike!"

Commentators Gary Thorne and Jim Palmer reference the classic Enrico Palazzo umpiring scene in "The Naked Gun" to describe the call the ump made.

God I love baseball.

OK, I May Have a Problem

Blogger was down for, oh, 25 minutes this morning when I wanted to put up that Marchman post. Here's a video representation of my agitation level during that time.

It would be one thing if this was a common problem, but I've used Blogger for almost five years now, and that's the first time I was ever not able to post the second I wanted to.

Thankfully I can, you know, quit blogging anytime I want.

[twitch-twitch-gag-shake-shudder-collapse]

Sweet, Wonderful Context

For as far as we have come in terms of baseball writers recognizing the notion of context, I'm certain that for as long as Chipper Jones stays within shouting distance of .400, we will see 10 mindless "Can Chipper do it?!" articles for every one, like this one from Tim Marchman, which rationally assesses his chances rather than simply concludes "nah probably not":

The main reasons why it's impossible to reach baseball's most mythic mark are quite plain. Most important is that much as the 60-home run campaign is basically an artifact of the steroid era, the .400 batting average was more or less an artifact of the early live ball era, when fielders hadn't yet adjusted, in terms both of technique and equipment, to new realities of the game. Between 1921 and 1930, batters hit .400 seven times, which is one more time than all major league hitters managed between 1901 and 1920 and between 1931 and the present day. We can either conclude that all the best hitters for average in history peaked in the 1920s and that all the best home run hitters in history peaked in our own time, or we can acknowledge that all baseball numbers are a product of their time, to be viewed with a wary eye.

Marchman goes on to make a great point that no one else is making, and that's that for as nice and satisfying as .400 might be, it may be just as big an accomplishment, adjusted for context anyway, for Jones to hit .375 as .406 was for Williams in 1941.

I Can't Watch

John Smoltz -- a guy whose name I first heard when the Braves traded Doyle Alexander for him 21 years ago -- is near the end. And I fear it may not be a pretty end:

Smoltz's body has issued another ultimatum — a final one, very likely — and the pitcher who has re-invented himself more than Madonna is at it again.

He has altered his arm angle, dropping down from the classic over-the-top delivery in order to preserve his aching shoulder.

And once more he has bounced himself to the bullpen, where theoretically he can best coax the last little bit of steam from an engine held together by baling wire, Elmer's and weapons-grade confidence.

As the article goes on to note, the last time Smoltz played around with his arm angle -- 1999 -- he ended up having Tommy John surgery. I remember watching those last pre-surgery games. Yes, he was still effective enough, but he looked odd and obviously wasn't happy with himself. I remember watching and thinking that Smoltz's labors were not unlike Bo Jackson's when he tried to run down the line after his hip replacement. The feeling that came over me in each instance wasn't pity or anything like that. Smoltz and Jackson were both astounding athletes, and even in their diminished, compromised conditions they did things mere mortals could only dream about. And make no mistake, each of them had earned the right to go out blazing, even if they weren't 100%. But they didn't go out -- or in Smoltz's case, out for a little while -- on their own terms and as themselves.

Wait, strike that. Being competitors willing to do anything to keep going probably is their terms. No, they didn't go out on my terms. My selfish, subjective terms that for as irrational as they may be, I simply can't shake.

I don't think athletes are heroes anymore. I know they are simply men doing a job, even if it is one that consumes their lives and which most of them would do for nothing. They owe me nothing, and I can't sit here and make any kind of rational case for how I think an athlete should approach the end of his career.

But dammit, I needed Jackson to end with a roar and not a whimper, just like I need Smoltz to end with a devastating split-finger fastball, not a sweeping sidearm curve.

As a Braves fan and a Smoltz fan, I hope to God he can pull it off. But I just don't know if I can stand to watch it.

WATFO

You're not going to believe this, but:

Mark Prior's season is over before it got started. Prior will have surgery this week to repair a tear in the anterior capsule of his right (pitching) shoulder.

Man.

And That Happened

Red Sox 9, Orioles 4: J.D. Drew goes 2-3 with a homer and three RBI after missing a couple of games for vertigo, of all things. Does vertigo just clear up like that? My daughter's current cold has lasted longer than Drew's vertigo did. Part of me wants to believe that he's in the middle of some elaborate game of injury bingo or a scavenger hunt or something and wanted to say he had something exotic. It'd almost be laughable if I still didn't have Nick Esasky's career-ending bought with it in mind some 18 years after the fact.

Reds 6, Braves 2: Per their usual routine, the Braves go on the road and play like utter garbage, dropping 5 of 6 to Milwaukee and the Cincinnati Jays. How they find themselves only 3.5 off the pace is beyond me. They now have seven games against Florida and Philly -- the two teams ahead of them -- and a six game trudge through Wrigley and Anaheim. I hate to be dramatic before Flag Day, but I feel quite strongly that the next thirteen games will make or break the Braves season.

A's 13, Rangers 8: Texas starter Scott Feldman didn't have the best outing a guy could have. He gave up four runs -- three of them earned -- on four hits in six innings, but he hit the showers after the sixth with his team up 7-4, and that's not half bad. Jamey Wright comes in for the top of the seventh and does this: single-walk-double-walk-gone, and the Rangers lead has been cut to 7-5. So then Robinson Tejeda gets the call and does this: walk-double-single, and its now 10-7, still with nobody out. Enough is enough. Call in Frank Francisco: homer-out-homer-out-out. Inning over, Rangers now down 13-7. The Rangers then hopped a plane to Cleveland, and I'm guessing it wasn't a cheery flight.

Tigers 7, Mariners 5: Curtis Granderson was telling reporters after the game not to count the Tigers out, and the AP recap called the win "the Tigers' third win in four games on their nine-game trip along the West Coast." That's one way to put it. Another way to put it is that in six games on the road trip, three of which came against a good team (the Angels) and three of which came against the worst team in baseball (the Mariners), the Tigers went 3-3. Isn't that about what you'd expect a decidedly mediocre club to do? So go ahead and get excited after blasting Putz for four runs in the ninth -- that's no easy trick -- but spare me the "here come the Tigers!" rhetoric until they actually string a few series wins together.

Royals 6, Indians 1: For as bad as the Royals have been lately, their May (11-19) wasn't all that much worse than the Indians' was (12-16).

Cubs 5, Rockies 3: Don't be alarmed! The corpse isn't really alive. You see, even after death, random nerve impulses occasionally cause muscle twitching, and the hair and fingernails continue to grow for some time post-mortem. It may be unsettling, sure, but don't you worry: The body is still quite dead. In related news, Jim Edmonds goes 2-3, 2B, 3B, 2 RBI.

Rays 4, White Sox 3: Tampa Bay wins 20 games in May. Unprecedented? Nope. They went 20-6 in June 2004.

Giants 4, Padres 3: Tim Lincecum pitches wonderfully once again (7 IP, 4 H, 1 R) but gets the no-decision because his first baseman hits like a backup catcher (.245/.314/.396) and his shortstop (.188/.264/.234) is channeling Ray Oyler. By the way, they should have given Brian Sabean some sort of award when Vizquel broke Aparicio's record for most games played at shortstop the other night. After all, if it wasn't for his fine efforts at managing the rebuilding in San Francisco, Vizquel would likely be out of baseball right now, his slot filled by someone who could actually help the Giants win games, and Aparicio's record would still stand. Yes, I know the Giants won. I just haven't said anything bad about them for a while and I was feeling the itch, ya know?

Mets 6, Dodgers 1: Looks like it's time for the tabloids to shift focus to the Yankees.

Help My Buddy Stick It To Selig And Maybe Win $100 Too

Well, sorta. Here's the deal:

My best friend from college runs a very cool company that provides a very cool product. It's called Zvents, and it's in the business of telling you what you should be doing with your life. Seriously, go try it. It will change the way you approach your weekends. Actually, you may already be using Zvents without realizing it, because in addition to its own site, it powers event search for a network of hundreds of local newspaper sites including big ones like the Boston Globe, the Denver Post, and the Orange County Register.

For our purposes, it's important to note that Zvents doesn't just tell you when the next poetry slam or KT Tunstall concert is. It covers sporting events, specifically baseball, with instant info (and links, links, links) about more baseball stuff than you can possibly imagine. Even my hometown, Columbus, Ohio, which has nothing more than a pretty sorry AAA team to its credit is rife with baseball fun I wouldn't have even known about if it weren't for Zvents. I'm guessing the same applies to your hometown too.

But I'm not posting this to simply shill for my buddy's company. For one thing he won't pay me to do it, so screw him. I'm posting this to ask you for help. Here's the problem: Zvents likes to match up visuals with its listings, but Bud's lawyers won't let it put, say, the cartoon bird or the crimson hosiery or any other official team logo next to a listing for the Orioles-Red Sox game, for example. Copyrights, you know. The result are boring listings that look like this. To fix this, I'm running a contest on behalf of my buddy and his company with the goal of (a) gussying up its baseball listings; and (b) doing an end-around Selig's lawyers. Here's what to do:

Send me a photo that best represents your team's home ballpark and/or a photo that best represents your home team without prominently including the team’s logo. It could be a field action shot, a team photo, a uniform shot, a picture of the team name that doesn’t include the actual logo, whatever. Examples that spring to mind: the ivy -- or, I dunno, drunken Lincoln Park Trixies -- at Wrigley. Monument Park at Yankee Stadium. The McCovey cove at AT&T Park. General apathy at Rogers Centre. Adam Dunn eating a four way at Skyline. Something -- anything -- that defines your team and/or its stadium in a picture without actually showing the logo.

The only catches are (1) the photos must be 1MB or large JPG; and (2) must be taken yourself, not horked off the web. See, when my buddy's company gets sued, he always calls me for free legal advice and, frankly, I don't want to have to deal with it.

The winning photos for each team/venue will have the pride of placement as the official photo of the stadium venue, and as the official photo of the team “performer” on Zvents (the photo will also show up on the Zvents-affiliated papers too, which means your picture of the Green Monster, for example will be in the Globe whenever people search for Sox events). One grand prize for best overall photo will get $100 and a Zvents t-shirt, and one almost-grand prize will get a t-shirt. Here's a picture of my son in a Zvents cap. It's a pretty cool logo.

So that's the deal. You're all going to a game sometime soon, and you all have digital cameras. Take a quick snapshot that screams "This is the Essence of My Team and Its Stadium," send it in, and get a chance at $100 bucks and some low-level Internet fame. As the possessor of low-level Internet fame I can tell you that it won't get you any dates, but it is an awful lot of fun.

Final bonus: I may very well use the submitted photos as a means of ripping off Andrew Sullivan's The View From Your Window feature. Send me cool shots of your team and ballpark -- again, that you took -- and you'll be multitasking for the greater good.

Thanks in advance,

Craig

Statheads Branching Out

So it turns out that Baseball Prospectus' Nate Silver is the poll cruncher behind FiveThirtyEight.com.

Neat.

The IBL Is No More

Last year when only about 11 people were reading this blog, I wrote several posts about the Israel Baseball League. And now? It is no more:

According to (league president Haim) Katz, the league's problems stemmed largely
from a number of Israeli creditors who, he said, had not been paid by the IBL.
"2008 is not happening, 2009 we're working on. Right now it's [nearly] the first
of June, and there's no preparation. But there are many parties interested in
reviving professional baseball [in Israel]."

Or we'll never see it again.

(link via Walkoff Walk)

How Selig Could Thwart Cuban

Maury Brown explains how Selig could play matchmaker in an effort to head off the Mark Cuban gambit I described yesterday:

So, while MLB may not want Cuban as part of their Lodge, what if Cuban decides he really is interested in the Cubs, and does some heavy cash-laden deal? How could Zell refuse? How could MLB stop letting the rabble rouser in?

How about a marriage?

Selig has been known to play match-maker. One need only look to 2006 to see his handy work (although, he said publicly he had nothing to do with the partnership).

The ownership of the Washington Nationals is the perfect template for what MLB will almost certainly do with the Cubs sale. While Cuban, on his own, could make a cash offer that would be challenging for each of the bidders individually to pull off, if Selig were to take front-runner (at least in MLB’s mind), John Canning, Jr. and move another bidder in as a minority owner along with Canning, you could compete with Cuban who most likely will fly solo in his efforts.

That's quite possible. But here's a question: doesn't that -- along with the rigged-bid scenario Rob Neyer described yesterday (Insider; sorry) -- assume that Mark Cuban is going to play the Huckleberry by bidding first and setting the target for the arranged marriage to shoot for (or to make the rigged bid)? Marriages between rival ownership groups have to be tricky things to put together. Could such a beast be nimble enough to withstand a scenario in which Cuban simply tells Zell to field all of the offers he can and then call him to get them topped? Or, more realistically, structure some kind of offer with escalator clauses and such that makes it quite difficult for the married group (or, in Neyer's scenario, the late-bidder) to beat? That is, assuming the other suitors -- who each presumably want to own the Cubs themselves anyway -- are willing to share the glory with the other group.

Sure, Cuban isn't going to go beyond what he's willing to pay, but that's OK because there are no guarantees in life. The point is that if Cuban is determined enough, it will be practically impossible for MLB to make Zell accept the less-than-best offer as it has done with other ownership groups in the past, and that given the mechanics of the situation -- not to mention Cuban's savvy -- it will be no easy trick for MLB to ensure that its horse is actually making the best offer.

I don't have a vested interest in seeing Cuban own the Cubs. I just want to see it be a fair, market-driven process. Based on the statements from Cuban and Zell's camp, that's probably what we're going to get here.

And Bud Selig has to be hating it.

You Got Me Feelin' (Negative) Emotions

Mariah Carey's ceremonial first pitch is pretty awful, but I think it's still better than the Mayor of Cincinnati's was a couple of years back.

By the way, I think that's Mark Kroon catching it. He's a pitcher, but he's from the Bronx, so it probably makes sense that he'd catch the smoke from a Long Island girl.

Ride Your War Horses Into Battle

I'm a facts-and-circumstances guy. I hate zero tolerance rules and, more generally, I hate any system in which people who know a thing or two are divested of their discretion to make informed, subjective judgments. Which is why, like Lou Piniella, I didn't lose any sleep over Zambrano throwing 130 pitches in Wednesday night's victory over the Dodgers:

Manager Lou Piniella had a handful of good reasons for leaving Carlos Zambrano in for 130 pitches in Wednesday night's game against the Dodgers."It was cool, he was throwing the ball well, I would have been booed out of the park if I took him out, and Carlos wouldn't have been happy if I took him out," Piniella said. "It was the right thing to do to leave him in the ballgame . . . I mean, 130 pitches, for a big, strong kid from Venezuela? Once in a while [it's OK]. I'm not talking four or five times in regularity, but once in a while the game dictates that you need to do that, and [Wednesday] night it dictated it, so we let it go.

I think that's right. Zambrano wasn't laboring. He was still working quickly. His velocity seemed good. I don't know a tenth about pitchers that Lou Piniella and Larry Rothschild do, but I would have left him in too.

The focus on pitch counts and innings pitched in recent years has been nothing short of revolutinary. Things like "the Joba Rules" would have been unthinkable even a decade ago, and basically every organization has their own variation on them, even if they're less publicized. On the whole that's probably a good thing, at least with respect to young pitchers. If I were running an organization I'm certain that I would take a cautious approach to developing young arms too. Indeed, my disdain for bright line rules aside, I would probably institute hard pitch counts until I was really really familiar with the individual tolerances and limitations of my pitching prospects.

But I'd be far less careful with experienced horses like Zambrano. As long as you're giving him normal rest between starts, are keeping him to a routine (i.e. not yanking him in to pitch four innings of relief between starts), and have experienced guys like Piniella watching him for signs of fatigue, I don't see why you should let a pitch count determine when you yank him. Guys like him (i.e. physically mature, experienced pitchers with sound mechanics) used to pitch a ton of innings back in the 60s and 70s, and I don't believe that the injury rate for starters was radically different then (please, someone tell me if I'm wrong on this).

I'm not suggesting a return to 300 IP seasons, necessarily, but by stretching the number of innings and pitches a guy like Zambrano throws, you are decreasing the number of pitches and innings thrown by guys like Jason Marquis, Ted Lilly, and Bobby Howry, and that's going to help the Cubs win.

Time Flies

Clayton Kershaw is happy to swtich to jersey number 22, which he will be wearing for his start against the Mets tonight. Why? Because it was the number his boyhood idol wore. Who was the idol? Will Clark. Nothing really weird about that until you remember that Kershaw is from Texas and was born in 1988, which means his entire experience with Clark was while he was a Ranger, not a Giant.

It's been a good week for feeling old.

And That Happened

Short one this morning. I was watching Lost like everyone else last night.

Mets 8, Dodgers 4: David Wright owns Brad Penny: 11-for-19, 4 HR, 5 BB.

Pirates 7, Reds 2: On Sunday, Dusty Baker decided to use Aaron Harang for four innings of relief in an extra-innings game. As a result of that -- and because he used Edinson Volquez the same way -- he had to reshuffle his rotation and throw Harang on three days' rest. The result: 4 IP, 10 H, 6 ER and the Reds' never having a chance.

Cardinals 3, Astros 2: Albert Pujols is at .359/.483/.630, with 13 dingers. Isn't he supposed to be missing an elbow or something?

Twins 5, Royals 1: The Kansas City bullpen pitches 3.2 innings of scoreless relief. It's a night too late, but in Kansas City, this passes for progress.

Blue Jays 12, A's 0: I noted in a BTF thread yesterday that no one should count the Yankees out yet because last year at this time they had a worse record and were 14.5 games back, only to rally and take the wild card. What I didn't think about at the time was that, unlike last year, no one in that division -- not even the Orioles -- is going to roll over and play dead this time around. Certainly not the Jays who, while no one is paying attention, are sneaking up on Boston and Tampa Bay.

White Sox 5, Rays 1: A month ago it was fashionable to say that the Sox were in first place by default and the collective futility of the competition. Now they've won 12 of 15, and someone, at some point, is going to have to give Ozzie Guillen credit for something besides his mouth.

Braves 8, Brewers 1: Chipper Jones goes 2-4, 2 BB and is now up to .420, with an OBP of an even .500. Mercy. Reclamation project Jorge Campillo pitches lights out again, only to have to leave early due to blisters for the second straight outing. Greenbrier East High School's own Seth McClung was less impressive his second time out (4.2 IP, 8 H, 6 ER, 6 BB). He'll have to do better than that if he ever wants to pass Bimbo Coles and Johnny Olson as Lewisburg's most famous native son.

Padres 5, Nationals 2: San Diego has scored 25 runs in the past four games which, for them anyway, is a major accomplishment.

Since We're Talking About Mark Cuban . . .

Following up on the Mark Cuban post from this morning, I thought some of you might like to read his thoughts on salary caps, which he posted on his blog the other day:

Can a league survive without a cap ? Yes, but I think it must be a league where it takes more than 1 or 2 players to lead a team to a championship. Otherwise, the richest teams can just buy those 2 players, with a 3rd as insurance, which means the competitive balance of the league is purely dependent on finances. That is not a good position to be in. Baseball and football are 2 leagues that I can think can survive (as baseball has) quite nicely without a cap. The NBA and NHL would struggle competitively without them.

There's a lot of analysis leading up to that conclusion, so please, click through and read it all. I'm kind of a dolt when it comes to capology because you don't need to understand it when all you really care about is baseball, but Cuban seems to make a lot of sense.

When times get tough again for baseball, as they most certainly will, ownership is going to start beating the salary cap drum again. Query: given that Cuban is on record saying salary caps are bad for baseball, is he the kind of guy they're going to want in their club?

I think the answer is no, but based on what I wrote this morning, I don't think they have a choice.

Baseball > Football

A subtle reminder of yet another way in which baseball beats the hell out of football. Say what you want about the merits of guaranteed contracts, but I would have a very hard time rooting for any organization that expects to assume zero risk with respect to its contract obligations and reserves the unilateral ability to renegotiate in midstream.

That's every organization in the NFL, by the way, and I simply can't watch a pro football game anymore without being conscious of the fact that every one of the players on the field is a single injury or incident away from losing their livelihood.

God, I Love Baseball

Nick Blakeley reports from Kansas City:

I arrived at Kauffman Stadium early yesterday to watch the Twins take batting practice before they tore the hearts out of Jose Guillen and myself. There were a lot of Twins fans around and some of them were hollering up to the press box to try to catch the attention of Bert Blyleven, who calls Twins games on TV.

These guys managed to pique Bert's interest and before long, Bert started throwing peanuts from the press box (a good 50-foot toss) in an attempt to get them in the Twins fan's cap. After a couple of misses, he started hitting the fan's cap with regularity and probably threw about a dozen before smiling, waving and returning to more announcer-ly duties.

When you're a Royals fan, you have to find joy in the little things, even if it means watching your opponent's broadcast team shoot 50-foot free throws into the caps of eager fans.

I heard that Don Sutton only made a half dozen peanut shots last time he was in Kansas City, yet he's favored to win the Frick Award before Blyleven does!

Cal Ripken Way

The Iron Man is getting a stretch of highway named after him:

Former Baltimore Oriole Cal Ripken Jr. has the record for the most consecutive games played in baseball. He has his own computer game, three books, a World Series ring, a satellite radio show and two minor league baseball teams.

Now baseball's "Iron Man" will have a section of Baltimore's Interstate 395 named after him. A stretch of I-395 between Interstate 95 and Conway Street outside Camden Yards will be renamed "Cal Ripken Way."

The official opening is tomorrow morning. Reconstruction and resurfacing is scheduled for summer 2024.

Don't Count Cuban Out

The Sun-Times' Gordon Wittenmyer reports that, contrary to the assumptions of many (myself included), Mark Cuban could very well end up owning the Chicago Cubs:

The outspoken Cuban, considered a long shot to gain approval from baseball's conservative owners, suggested in a recent radio interview that some of those owners who also have NBA teams should help his cause, not hurt it. And he suggested Tribune Co. isn't likely to accept a lesser bid over a popularity contest.

So should Cubs fans believe Cuban is a more viable bidder than early reports suggested? ''They're all viable until the league tells us they're not,'' said Cubs chairman Crane Kenney, who is heading owner Sam Zell's efforts to sell. ''[Cuban] owns a professional basketball team, right? Somebody thought he was a suitable owner of a professional team. But it's not my job to say who's viable and who isn't.''

Like I often say, I tend to over analyze things. To read between the lines and find things that may not really be there. To infer multitudes from minutiae, as it were. I'm going to do it again by throwing this out there: Mark Cuban and Sam Zell are warning Bud Selig that he had better not stand in their way unless he wants some potentially disastrous litigation on his hands.

To get to that admittedly out-there conclusion, you have to understand that the basis for baseball being able to approve or disapprove of who owns teams is a really frickin' shaky one, legally speaking. Yes, there is an antitrust exemption, but the only court to ever consider the matter held that the exemption does not apply to the purchase and sale of franchises.

That came in Piazza v. Major League Baseball, 831 F. Supp. 420 (E.D. Pa. 1993), in which some gentlemen from Pennsylvania tried to buy the Giants and move them to Florida. Then-Giants' owner Bob Lurie was going to sell, but MLB stepped in and indicated that it would not approve the sale. The buyers sued, arguing (among other things) that baseball illegally restrained free trade in the market in which baseball teams are bought and sold. Baseball argued that it was allowed to do this pursuant to the antitrust exemption. The trial court agreed with the would-be buyers during the preliminary stages of that case, ruling that the antitrust exemption didn't apply to the purchase of teams. Granted, this wasn't a final decision on the merits. Rather, the court basically ruled that if the plaintiffs could prove that MLB wrongfully thwarted the sale -- say, that baseball had no legitimate business basis for excluding a potential ownership group --they could win.

Of course it never got that far. Having seen that its antitrust exemption was in peril, baseball settled with the plaintiffs, paying them $6 million for their trouble, and the case went away. Since that time, baseball has continued to approve or deny "ownership applications" as though they were country club memberships as opposed to the restraint of the sale of goods in a free market. It has been able to get away with this because, to my knowledge, no one since the Pennsylvania people in the Piazza case have raised a fuss over a team sale, and with no dispute, there can be no court case. Why no dispute? I'd guess it's because all existing owners since the Piazza case have, out of some sense of loyalty perhaps, taken MLB's temperature as to whether they approve of the buyer before actually accepting an offer to sell (if owner x doesn't accept, there is no deal in the first place). At the same time, there has been no self-respecting businessman who would want to sue his way into a club that acts in such a provincial, petty-ante fashion.

But . . . what would happen if you had the perfect storm in the form of (a) a current owner who doesn't feel loyal enough to Selig and Co. that he feels the need to pre-screen buyers; and (b) a determined enough buyer -- a maverick if you will -- that doesn't mind fighting his way into the club? In light of Piazza -- a non-binding case but one that is oh-so-ripe for citation -- wouldn't that cause major headaches for baseball? Would they dare put the antitrust exemption in peril in order to keep out an undesirable owner?

I think Sam Zell and Mark Cuban are testing that. When Cuban cites the fact that he's already an owner of a pro team, he's reminding baseball that it's going to have to search hard to find a legitimate basis for excluding him. More significantly, however, when Zell's subordinate underscores that it's the league -- and not the Tribune Company -- who will be rejecting bidders, he's making it clear that the defacto vetting system long in place is not going to happen here. In other words, he's highlighting the fact that Major League Baseball could very well have the nightmare scenario on their hands: a qualified buyer making the high bid and a willing seller accepting it, thereby requiring baseball to quash the deal. That, I believe, wouldn't hold up in court. Especially not in an Illinois court in a case in which the Tribune Company is a party.

Will it come to that? I seriously doubt it. For one thing, we don't really know that baseball really wants to keep Cuban out. We suspect it does because Selig and Co. have long preferred pliable ownership groups who feel they owe something to the league, but we don't know it for sure. Still, there is some degree of uncertainty on this point, and in light of that uncertainty, I think that Cuban and Zell are, to use a lawyer's phrase, making their record. If Selig and his lawyers are listening carefully -- and I'll bet they are -- they're probably realizing about now that there is simply no percentage in trying to keep Cuban out of the club.

What does this all mean? Call me crazy, but I think it means that Mark Cuban is going to be the next Cubs' owner.