I'm really not trying to pick on Sky

It's just he keeps writing commentaries that are marred with fallacious logic. I'm going to skip to the conclusion of his article:


Even a great closer like Nathan rarely makes a huge difference

The Twins will most likely be replacing Nathan and his 1.80 ERA with a guy whose ERA is 1.5 to 2 runs higher. Whereas Nathan would likely allow just 14 runs in his customary 70 innings of work, his replacement will probably allow nearly double that amount. When you factor in that the closer's innings are worth about 70-percent more than regular innings because of the highly important situations in which they pitch, the number of effective runs given away due to Nathan's absence is about 22. Add in the fact that the Twins' other relievers will now be pitching in more important roles and the math says that the overall impact of the Nathan injury is about 30 runs, translating to about three wins.
Three wins. Losing a closer -- even one of the greatest of all time -- simply isn't terribly costly.
Don't get me wrong, three wins is nothing to sneeze at, and teams pay big money for that kind of production, but in the end even the mighty Nathan is worth only a handful of games. Losing the best closer in baseball may feel like a huge blow to Twins fans, but the reality is that his absence won't dramatically change the course of Minnesota's season. If the Twins finish .500 this year, it probably won't be accurate for fans to say, "If only we had Nathan, we could have been contenders." Likewise, if you thought the Twins would be great before the injury, the loss won't prevent Minnesota from still being a very good ball club.

Just 3 wins. Last year the Twins won the division thanks to a play-in game. The year before that, the Twins lost the division on a play-in game. 2006, division was decided by 1 game. So 3 of the last 4 years, the division has been decided by 1 game. Also, I know Sky didn't waste time doing any real calculations on this, and couldn't be bother to go here, but Nathan has a WAR of about 2 for the last 3 years.

I love how Sky throws in that "teams pay big money for that kind of production" casually when describing how unimportant Nathan is to the Twins.

The real impact of Nathan's injury -- if he does indeed require season-ending surgery -- will only occur if the Twins are once again on the cusp of making the playoffs. If so, his absence could be enough to cause Minnesota to narrowly miss the postseason.

I already pointed that out. That's why his injury does matter.

Various experts have the Twins picked to finish around .500 this season, although with no clear leader in the AL Central, one could easily see the White Sox, Indians, Tigers or Twins all having a legitimate chance at winning the division.

What about the Royals?!?!

It's true that the loss of Nathan is a blow to the Twins' chances, but in the big picture Minnesota's championship hopes will rest far more on the performance of the other 24 players in the clubhouse than on whether or not Joe Nathan is healthy.

Good point Sky, the other 24 players are more valuable than 1 closer.

Case closed!

Good Article VI

An excellent article about punting in football by Greg Easterbrook. The part about punting is near the bottom of the page.

Peter Kerasotis Tries to Define Leadership

Patton. Napoleon. Regan. All leaders of various success. One thing I've learned about baseball is that all it takes to become a leader is being old. Almost every sports writer likes to imbue special leadership powers on any player older than...say 35. Peter Kerasotis is no different. (me in regular/Pete in italics)

Peter Kerasotis: Pudge brings leadership to Nats

I can't help but feel that's the manager's job.

There are two distinct images I have from the 2003 World Series, the one that the Florida Marlins won against the New York Yankees.
Both involve Ivan "Pudge" Rodriguez.

Really? Cause I'm pretty sure most people remember Beckett dominating those playoffs.

Both will mean something special for the Washington Nationals, who played their spring training home opener Saturday and hope to escape the NL East cellar and the 205 combined losses (worst in baseball) over the past two seasons.

Why on earth would they mean anything to the Nationals this year? It was over half a decade ago. Also, they can't escape the 205 losses. They already happened.

Rodriguez, 38, might not be a leader on this Nationals team.

Um, did you read your headline?

He'll likely be the leader.

What? Peter, did you not read those two sentences? How did you put them back to back? That's just plain awful. The point of your article is that he WILL be a leader.

Certainly, he'll be more than just the catcher for a young Nats' pitching staff.

So we've gone from 'might not be' to 'likely will be' to 'certainly'. That is maybe the worst paragraph I've read since I started doing this blog.

And that's where those two distinct images from the 2003 World Series come in.

Yes, they come in when you randomly insert them into your article, terrific.

The first image I have occurred before Game 2, in the dank runway that led from the visiting clubhouse to the old Yankee Stadium field. As the Marlins were ready to take the field for warm-ups, rookie pitcher Dontrelle Willis was on his cell phone.
"Hey, get off the phone," Rodriguez told Willis.
Dontrelle raised a finger to the air.
"Give me a minute," he said.
Rodriguez leaned into Willis and with a measured voice not unlike a parent giving a child a final warning said, "Get off the phone -- now! We're here to work. We have a job to do."
Willis' phone snapped shut.
And that, boys and girls, is your definition of leadership.

I wish Rodriguez would do that during rush hour when ever idiot in front of me is talking on their cell.

I asked Pudge about that exchange from seven years ago when we recently chatted in the Nationals' spring training clubhouse. I didn't expect him to remember it, but he did.
"We had a job to do," he said, echoing almost the exact same words he said in 2003. "Everything has its time. That was not the time to be on the phone."

That's what being a leader is? Knowing when to be or not be on a cell phone?

All of this means something now, because now Pudge is back in the same spring training clubhouse that he was in when the Marlins began their world championship run in 2003 behind a young pitching staff.

Yeah...that doesn't mean anything. That's called a coincidence.

I rattle off some of the names of those young pitchers, just in case Pudge had forgotten. Of course, he hadn't. I mentioned Josh Beckett, Carl Pavano, Brad Penny, Dontrelle Willis . . .

"Don't forget A.J. Burnett," Pudge said. I had forgotten.
"Burnett got injured," Pudge reminded. "Imagine how good we could've been if he was healthy."

So that's what it takes, you have to remember the names of the pitchers. Nice of the starting catcher on the team to do that.

Rodriguez commanded that pitching staff and raised the level of those playing around him, so much so that this is what Marlins manager Jack McKeon said at the time: "He's played remarkably well. And in the playoffs, he's been spectacular. He picked us up. He showed the guys how it should be done. The only way to lead by example is to do it. Everybody looks up to you to do it. And he does it."
Again, leadership.

So we have remember fellow players names and playing well. So in San Francisco, Shawn Dunston was halfway there. (I'm assuming he remembered players names)

Now listen to Pudge's current manager with the Nationals, Jim Riggleman. "He's very confident. The way he receives the ball, the way he throws it back to the pitcher with authority."

Throwing the ball back to the pitcher with authority. Check.

"He also has no hesitation in expressing his views, and when he says something all ears are on him. "

Like Glen Beck.

A lot of people just want to watch his work, and there's always a buzz amongst the other catchers when he's around. It's pretty special just to get to watch him."
He is, after all, a pretty special player.

Pudge is one of the all-time great catchers, so that's no surprise.

Brian Bruney pitched for the World Champion New York Yankees last year and was in their organization the past four seasons. He's a veteran who's been around.

From Wikipedia: Bruney spent part of the season on the disabled list, but managed to collect a 3.92 ERA and 1.51 WHIP in 39 innings pitched. He did not appear in the ALDS against the Twins or the ALCS against the Angels, but was speculated as a possibility to be added to the World Series roster. On October 28, it was announced that Bruney would be replacing backup catcher Francisco Cervelli on the 40-man roster for the World Series.

I'm not going to rip the player, he's had his ups and downs, but that does not sound like a solid resume. He's certainly not a star in the league just because he pitched for the Yankees.

Yet, he finds himself gravitating to Rodriguez, trying to absorb all that he can.

He should, Rodriguez has had a great career and Bruney hasn't.

"He's one of those older guys who's been around the game and understand what it takes to win and be successful," Bruney said. "I've sat and just talked with Pudge, trying to learn. I want his feedback. I want to be around guys like him. He'll only make you better."

Hey! A valid argument for Pudge being a leader. He can teach you to be a better player.

Which brings us to the other distinct image I have of Pudge Rodriguez from that 2003 World Series. Clippard talked about fun, and what makes the game fun is winning. All players will tell you they want to win. Few, though, have a real passion for it.

Apparently, Kerasotis used his patented "Passion to Win" stethoscope and looked inside all the players. In most he just found a passion to score with supermodels; some, a passion to eat (Zambrano I'm looking at you); and in two, a passion to win. (The other of course being Alex Rodriguez. He found that and steroids, lots and lots of steroids.)

Pudge Rodriguez is one of those few players.
I was in the Marlins' clubhouse during the postgame celebration after they won that 2003 World Series and saw a lot of happy faces. But it's Pudge's face that I still see. It glowed. Happy? The man was in ecstasy.

Yeah Peter, he just won a World Series.

And now that he's won a World Series and likely has a ticket already punched to Cooperstown, what keeps him going?
"I love what I do," he said.
It was all he needed to say.

Also the money, I'm sure he likes the money.

He will lead this team, not to the World Series because this team is not that good. But he will lead them.
The Nationals will do well to follow.

I really like that line, this kind of sad admission of reality. So again I say, the only thing that sports writers require for a player to be named a leader is to be older than the rest of the team.

Case Closed!