I Didn't Realize That Last Post

...was number 100. If I had known I would have tried to make it special, or at least interesting. Anyway, time for a Strasburg update since I've now dedicated this blog to following the young fellas career. The Nationals are thinking of shutting Strasburg down for the season? No! What will I use for filler on the blog?

Correlation

Sometimes you can draw parallel lines between two separate entities and gauge where one will end up. TNA and WCW for example. But you have to be careful, as they say correlation is not causation. That's a lesson that Thomas Boswell forget when he wrote this column:

History reminds us Stephen Strasburg is better off not being an all-star yet

Wow, that is a heck of a premise. Strasburg is better off not being showcased in the biggest game of the regular season (ratings wise). This is going to be a tough thesis to prove, I can tell that already.

Each baseball era thinks it is unique.

I've never heard a baseball era call itself unique. And really, the more I re-read this line, the less it makes sense to me.

More often, it duplicates past plots precisely.

Yeah like the one where Jeter lost his wedding ring. So him and his buddy Rivera had to cover it up while searching for a ring that looked just like it. And then it turned out his wife had just taken it in to be resized. Same plot as an episode of 'I Love Mantle' 40 years earlier. There is no originality in sports anymore.

Stephen Strasburg might have been this decade's version of Mark Fidrych, Fernando Valenzuela or Hideo Nomo, rookie pitchers who started All-Star Games in '76, '81 and '95, respectively. But Strasburg, 21, didn't even make the all-star team because the Washington Nationals didn't call him up to the big leagues until June. That's good luck for Strasburg. He probably caught a break.
Strasburg can take a few days off...

Stop there and we're good. He's a rookie who the Nationals are taking their time with, and it's good for him to just have the days off rather than fly out of LA and pitch for an inning.

...and be glad he's not being worshipped for two thrilling performances and four promising but flawed ones.

Here are the game logs for Strasburg. He gave up 2,1,1,1,3,2 earned runs in his first 6 starts. The only flaws are ones he doesn't have control over. Strasburg is kept on a short leash as far as his pitches thrown go. Also the Nats offense can't score, which is not his fault.

And he can skip a week-long debate about whether he deserves to be an all-star after six starts and two career wins.

Looks like you're continuing it here. I'm pretty sure the debate is going to rage on anyway, at least until the break is over.

"We were okay with either outcome. On balance, it's probably better this way," said Nats President Stan Kasten after Strasburg made neither the 33-man NL roster nor the five-player Final Vote for fan balloting. "Stephen was embarrassed by it."
Embarrassed may not be a strong enough word. To one National, Strasburg said, "They don't respect the game."

I don't know where this info actually came from. Maybe Boswell overheard it when he was in the locker room, or he heard it through the reporter grapevine. I cannot tell who "They" is supposed to be.


When it comes to Major League Baseball, "they" usually don't respect it.

What makes him think Major League Baseball is "they"? I'm assuming we're talking about the league offices. I don't see any evidence that they don't respect the game they make million of dollars off. Why did he say this? That quote could be about the steroid policy, or cutting off drinking after the 7th inning. Whom was it said about? The league offices? Reporters? Fans? The crew from Major League? Cause if it was the crew from Major League, I vehemently disagree. You're the reporter Boswell, shouldn't you find some of this stuff out?

So, if enough National League pitchers get hurt, or Strasburg strikes out enough Giants on Friday, he might still be Anaheim-bound.

NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!! He's not on the voting and he wasn't picked. He could strike out 50 Giants and he still wouldn't get there. He could strike out ACTUAL Giants and he wouldn't get there. Good Ol' Jolly Green has great opposite field power BTW.


Sensible words came from NL Manager Charlie Manuel, who said Strasburg got "quite a bit of consideration but what's he got, like five starts? He's gonna be an all-star for a long time. . . . I felt like, 'Just leave him alone and let him get used to the major league level.' " Will the old Red Devil sing the same tune if his arm gets twisted by Sunday?

Twisted by whom? He already made his roster choices. And I keep hearing the argument that "He's gonna make a lot of all-star teams." Why are all these people so sure he's gonna be an all-star for a long time? People said that about Prior, Van Popple, Zito. You don't (well some people do) vote for Jamie Moyer for the Cy Young because Jimenez will get plenty of them.

The Nats and Strasburg may not realize how fortunate they are.

I see no evidence of that. When he's pitching the Nats sell out, and when he's not, they don't even broadcast the games locally. (May or may not be true)

Periodically, baseball endorses a kind of unholy mid-summer child sacrifice for the sake of marketing.

That is a heck of a reach for that metaphor. If that metaphor could play first base I would sign it on the spot.

With hindsight, many young pitchers were at, or close to their career peaks on the week they dominated all-star celebrations. A self-reinforcing tornado of expectation, anticipation (and money) tempts the sport, and the player's own team, to use up arms and strain psyches as if they were maxing out somebody else's credit card.

Wow. That's some writing there by Boswell. Two metaphors in one poorly constructed sentence. And only one of those metaphors makes any real sense. "A self-reinforcing tornado?" What on Earth does that mean?

Perhaps because the Fidrych sanctification was the first All-Star Game I covered, I came away convinced that it's rarely good for a 21-year-old pitcher to be the baseball world's obsession for a week.

Well then, if you witnessed it happen one time, they obviously it must be true. You're personal observation trumps any common sense.

People start to believe the Superman talk, the "best-ever" mythology and, above all, the delusion that the phenom is so special he's indestructible.
On two days rest after his all-star start, Fidrych pitched his third 11-inning complete game of the year. He won, 1-0. But a pattern was set. No, don't take the Bird out of the game. He can do it. So, he pitched complete games in 31 of his first 37 starts. By the '77 All-Star Game he was disabled and won only four more games the rest of his career.

That's why the Nationals have not let Strasburg throw 100 pitches yet. To avoid that sort of thing. I'm guessing it was throwing all those complete games that ruined Fidrych, not the 2 innings in an all-star game and a lot of attention.

The more amazing the talent, the greater the danger of ruining it by forgetting that the possessor of the gift is just a young man. Baseball sometimes eats its young, especially pitchers, if they make the mistake of being too good too instantaneously.
The attention that the Bird relished and Valenzuela endured were fame-sated experiences that invert any normal life arc. Over the years, other youngsters were only slightly less adored. The impact on their arms or characters was seldom positive whether it was Dwight Gooden at age 19 or Mark Prior at 22. Even Nomo, who was 26 when he made his debut, never duplicated, and seldom approached, the first half of his first season.

Wow. There are so many other reasons for each person's failure than playing in the all-star game. Gooden, lifestyle. Prior, injuries. Nomo, league adjusted to him.

For Strasburg, the aggravations of the next week would've topped any previous hot rookie. His selection would've made perfect modern controversy -- a trivial issue inflated to a lovely fuss. With rosters expanded to 34 players, about four more than needed, we'd have been asked to feel outrage that Strasburg took the place of somebody who would not even have merited consideration in any other year since 1933.

I know I keep asking this but WHAT? What is Tom Boswell talking about? What is he basing the assumption that Strasburg would be met with aggravation during next week's festivities? What aggravation is he referring to? Would Strasburg have to read this article over and over? Why throw in the "four more than needed" line? That's a totally separate issue. Who would have asked us to "feel outrage" about Strasburg? I'm guess the answer has the initials T.B. And I'm pretty sure the last 13 words were written for a different article and just thrown in here by the editor.


The comparison between Strasburg and Valenzuela may be helpful and sobering. Strasburg isn't being wronged, nor fans denied, by waiting to anoint him an all-star. The Nat may become one of the best pitchers of his era. But Valenzuela raised the possibility that he was already the best pitcher who ever lived. There were no clicks or hits to measure in '81, but Fernandomania topped Strasmas for capturing "mind-share."

Eh, that's relatively clever as a play on "win-shares." I don't get the "no clicks or hits to measure" thing. They counted hits. I don't know what click refers to. Radar gun I would suppose and I'm sure they used those back then also.

In Valenzuela's first eight starts (8-0) -- seven complete games, five shutouts -- he had a 0.50 ERA. To add to the silliness, he was batting .360. In time, he came back to earth -- if you consider pitching the Dodgers to a world title as a rookie part of this planet.

Wow, I remember my grandfather mentioning something like that when it came to Valenzuela's initial run. Strasburg can't touch that I suppose.

So far, Strasburg hasn't held a team without a run. In part due to a pitch count, he's left two games in mid-inning and lasted only five innings in another. Twice, he's walked men in bunches. He's been mortal against lefthanded hitters (.702 OPS), especially slap hitters, and has been quite vulnerable with men on base (.319/.803).

That is just the definition of cherry picking stats. He doesn't even give us numbers against so-called "slap hitters." He also fails to give us league averages with any of those stats for comparison. For all I know an .803 OOPS is terrific with MOB.

That March concern that he was too quick from the stretch, a reason for seasoning, may not be fully solved.

I'm gonna rewrite that since it was so poor: The concern in March about his motion still lingers. Scouts (I assume, he never mentions who had this fear) fear Strasburg moves too quickly through the stretch and requires more seasoning.

On the other hand, nobody throws as hard as Strasburg does -- average fastball 97.5 mph, ahead of Ubaldo Jimenez (96.4) and all-star reliever Neftali Feliz (96.3). Nobody's changeup is as goofy fast (89.8). When it comes to strikeouts-per-nine-innings or percentage-of-swings-and- misses, Strasburg is ahead of any current starter and, at least so far, compares to Randy Johnson in his prime.

Those are great reasons he should be in the all-star game. That was the point of this article right?

In the stat ratios that reveal monster stuff, the only pitchers Strasburg resembles are the top power-pitching closers -- like Jonathan Broxton, Billy Wagner and José Valverde. But those relievers only have to blow up a storm for one inning. Strasburg can keep up the hurricane winds for 95 pitches and presumably 10 to 20 more by '11-'12.

More great reasons for Strasburg to be on the team! What a reasonable and well written column.

The truth is that, compared to the best young rookies of the past, Strasburg isn't quite ready for an All-Star Game. He's still kicking at the mound in Cleveland, getting caught in a five-run inning in Atlanta and looking vexed at an umpire on Saturday.

I'm not sure where to start with this one. I'm going to just go blanket and say two of those reasons are completely ridiculous. The innings thing is all dumb since Boswell spent the last two paragraphs giving us much better statistical evidence why Strasburg deserves to be there.

He didn't start with complete games and shutouts like Fernando.

Yeah, he's not allowed to complete games so he doesn't ruin his arm.

He hasn't matched Kerry Wood, who at 21 pitched a nine-inning, 20-strikeout, one-hitter...

Wow, one game, sounds like an all-star to me.

and was 8-3 with 149 strikeouts by all-star selection time.

Those are decent reasons, though they are all counting stats.

Yet Wood wasn't on that '98 team.

And his career turned out just the way people pictured thanks to that omission.

Strasburg has perhaps the best all-around stuff in baseball and, often, exceptional command.

Sure would be great if everyone could see him perform on the biggest stage of the summer.

But, just as important for his long-run place in the sport, Strasburg actually seems to respect the game. That, and a healthy (knock on wood) arm, may take care of any all-star debates involving the Nationals right-hander for quite some time.

So here is a list of players that were 21 or younger and made the All-Star team. Some of them worked out and had huge careers. Some didn't. So it looks like there's no real correlation. If you want to argue that Strasburg hasn't pitched in enough games, fine, I agree. But Boswell's whole thing about it'll ruin Strasburg is hogwash and speculation.

Case Closed.

How to Cherry Pick Stats

By Mark Potash. (Me in regular/him in Italics)

Like a shot of "5-Hour Energy," interleague play gives the White Sox a boost when they need it most. No crash later? We'll see about that.
On paper, the Sox are the second-hottest team in baseball, having won six straight games and 10 of their last 11 to reach the .500 mark (34-34), still 5 1/2 games behind the Twins and four behind the Tigers in the AL Central. (The Rangers have won eight straight and 11 of 12).
The big question is whether or not this is fool's gold. The bulk of the Sox' recent streak has come against the Cubs, Pirates and Nationals. The Cubs are in a season-long funk, losing 12 of their last 19 games; the Pirates have lost 18 of their last 23, including 12 in a row; the Nationals have lost 15 of their last 21 -- three of their six victories in that span came against the Pirates.

So far those are some pretty good reasons why this was a mirage. The White Sox Pythagorean btw is 32-36.

There's no doubt that interleague play is a drop in class for American League teams. It has been for years and this one is no different. The AL leads the NL 92-76 so far in 2010. American League pitchers in particular have an easier time against National League teams -- and vice-versa. Roy Halladay is 8-3 with a 1.51 ERA against NL teams this season. He's 0-3 with a 6.86 ERA against the AL. And he's been in the National League for less than three months.

Yes, let's take his ERA from this year as opposed to the 07-09 when he had an ERA of 3.03 in the AL (does include interleague games from those years. But still). And let's keep in mind he put those numbers up in the AL East. That is example #1 of cherry picking stats.

This is old hat for Sox fans. In 2008, a 12-6 record in interleague play helped keep them afloat in the AL Central and they barely hung on to win the division title. Last year the Sox were 28-33 when interleague play (they were 12-6 again) sparked a 15-5 run that put them 2 1/2 games back in the division. The momentum kept them in contention until August, when they lost nine of 10 against the Red Sox, Yankees and Twins and were done.

That right there just screams "We are not a playoff caliber team."

But as dubious as the competition has been of late, the current streak has a better feel to it this year.

So one reason this year is different is Mark feeeeeels differently about it. Solid.

The Sox are winning because they've been playing better baseball -- and not just because they're playing weaker competition.

Um, you just spent half the article pointing out how they were facing weaker teams. They beat the Cubs, Pirates, and Nationals. Went 8-1 against them. What was their record against the Red Sox, Yankees and Twins last year again? It seems you mentioned it earlier.

Stephen Strasburg literally looked like Sandy Koufax on Friday night...

Here is a picture of Koufax. Here is one of Strasburg. Or is this Koufax and this Strasburg? (side note, the chest hair in the second picture is nuts.) I can't tell because they LITERALLY look alike.

...and the Sox found a way to win. I don't recall that happening too often in previous years.

That's cause Strasburg wasn't in the league in previous years. And I'm willing to bet the White Sox won other games 1-0. Hey here's one now! (45 second to find that on bbref.com. Most of that was loading time.) Here's a game a Chicagoan should probably remember, especially if it's their job to cover sports. That's being specific. If I want to be a jerk I'll point out that the White Sox 'found' a way to win 79 times last year.

In the current 10-1 streak, the Sox have won with timely pitching,

I don't have any clue what that means. The pitchers get people out during the course of the game. Not before the game or after the game, but during. That's timely.

timely hitting and timely defense.

See previous joke.

They're 4-1 in one-run games (14-8 for the season). They've won four games with three runs or less.

One-run games are mostly luck. The other stat...I don't know what that signifies. At all.

They've pitched 32 of 34 scoreless innings with a one-run lead.

They have a good bullpen, but that stat seems more like luck than anything. Not the scoreless innings part, but when they come.

They've allowed 14 runs in 11 games after the fourth inning -- eight of them while they had leads of four runs or more.

I love baseball and baseball stats. I have NO IDEA what the first half of that means. He just randomly picked 11 games and randomly picked an inning as a cut off. It means less than nothing. Mark, listen, just say the White Sox bullpen is doing well and give their ERA.

They're scoring runs for Freddy Garcia (55 in his last nine starts) and playing defense for Jake Peavy.

I can imagine Paul Konerko standing up in front of all the starters on opening day:
"Alright, so we, the offense, have come to the decision that we are only going to play the games half-assed. So each of you have to choose: we can play immaculate defense for you; or we can rock the ball on offense for you."
Buehrle: "Why can't you do both?"
Paul sighs, "Mark you just don't understand baseball. Now everyone choose quickly, I gotta get to the Blackhawks game."
"But we have a game tonight!"
Paul shakes his head: "Mark, you're really starting to become a problem."

When Garcia allowed three runs in the fourth inning to fall behind 3-1 against the Nationals on Sunday, the Sox responded with six straight hits and four runs for a 5-3 lead. Garcia pitched two scoreless innings and the Nationals didn't score again.

Yeah the relief staff really shut the Nats down. Shame they don't get any press from Potash. I mean you can't even mention Putz (ERA+ 203)? Or Santos (ERA+ 173)?

Yes it was the Nationals. And the Cubs. And the Pirates. But I would submit that while the Sox aren't as good as Kenny Williams thought, they've been an underachieving team all season.

According to their Pythag they're OVERachieving.

Sometimes a team like that just needs a little boost to get them on track. Of course you have to see it to believe it -- this is the White Sox we're talking about. But I have a feeling this season is not over yet.

And as we already established, Mark's feeeeelings are what matter. That and his horrible interpretations on statistics.

Case Closed!

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!

Mark DeCotis loves NASCAR

Which is a sport, when it comes to knowledge, he could...man I don't want to use the phrase 'run circles around me' but I can't think of anything else. Baseball, however, is a different story as we'll see in this piece published by FloridaToday.com (me in regular/Mark in italics):

Gotta love game of baseball

Couldn't agree more Mr. DeCotis.

Baseball's back and it should be savored for what it is: A game that demands perfection yet rewards with failure.

Que?

As the Washington Nationals pitchers and catchers hold their first formal workout of the spring this morning in Viera, they will prepare for the 162-game grind that will test them and their teammates to their limits for precious little in return aside from the monetary compensation.

Que? The monetary compensation is pretty good, even if you're a back up catcher on the Nationals. Right Will Nieves? He made $445,000 last year for a 65 OPS+. So let us not just toss aside the 'monetary compensation.' It's a pretty good return.

Quick, name another group of practitioners -- the lunkheads on Wall Street aside -- who are paid so well to come up short.

Take that! Lunkheads on Wall Street! Way to cause the downfall of the American Economy! You jerks.

I'm waiting. Meanwhile, consider these numbers:

Ooooo numbers...I love those.

Songs are written about teams such as the New York Yankees that won 103 regular-season games en route to their 27th World Series championship in 2009. But, they also lost 59 times.

I don't even know what to say about that. Good teams get songs written about them. And the 59 loses thing...wow...I really don't know how to respond to that. That's a really great season though either way you look at it.

As a team, the Los Angeles Angels led the big leagues with a .285 batting average. That means their batters failed at the plate more than seven out of 10 times.

If we're rounding, then yes. Also you wanted to use OBP there, not BA. NO ONE uses BA anymore, it's soooo...90's.

Conversely, the Nationals ranked 22nd out of the 30 teams with a .258 average.

Yeah, this is WHY no one uses BA anymore. The Nationals ranked 12th in OBP. Middle of the pack. So they actually made up for their poor BA by being patient and getting on base.

Minnesota catcher Joe Mauer won the American League batting title with a .365 average. Great, but he still failed more than six times out of 10.

Or we can say he was successful almost 4 times out of 10. Glass half full/glass broken into shards. Also, haven't half a dozen comedians done this bit about baseball players failing more times than not?

Pitching-wise, four players led the bigs with 19 wins apiece last season. So between them they won 76 games. But they also lost 30.

What does this have to do with loving baseball?

How can you not love a game that looks so simple that the guy balancing a beer on his belly in the Bob Uecker seats can maintain that he could have hit that ball or caught that ball or stole that base? After all, he did when he played Little League.
Guess what Bubba, this ain't kiddie ball.

That has nothing to do with what ANYONE loves about baseball. And should a guy who maintains a NASCAR blog be making fun of baseball fans by calling them 'Bubba'?

As Nationals senior assistant for player development and baseball lifer Pat Corrales -- he's in his 51st spring training -- said: "These are the best ballplayers in the world."

What, did he accidentally go to the Yankees spring training facility instead? I keed, I keed. The Nationals are a professional baseball team and therefore also have some great talent compared against everyday people. Compared against the rest of the league...well...

Any questions about the stature of the bigs were resolved on Friday. That's when a good number of Taiwanese journalists traveled halfway around the world to attend the Nationals introductory press conference at Space Coast Stadium for pitcher Chien-Ming Wang, considered the finest athlete his nation has ever produced.

Seriously? I'm just going to list two here on the site, but you can look it up on Wikipedia for more:
Tiger Mask IV
The Great Sasuke

Yet the claim to fame for the former Yankee is he won 19 games twice while losing six and seven games respectively in 2006 and 2007. OK, but his big league totals are 55 victories and 26 losses and a 4.16 earned run average, numbers that say big league hitters figured him out more than a few times.

Why did that paragraph start with 'yet?' Isn't that part of the reason why he's considered one of the greatest athletes Taiwan produced?
Wang was a pitcher I really liked because he screwed with all the sabermetric measurements for a few years (on the surface). He couldn't strike anyone one out and had no speed on his fastball. He just had a knack for getting guys to hit below the league average and not giving up homeruns. Oh yeah, his wins...HE PITCHED FOR THE YANKEES!!!! And the number that says big league hitters figured him out was last year's ERA (not the best stat I know) of 9.64. Not his 26 loses. Also he has shoulder problems.

That's the truth of baseball. The game day in and day out can engender enough self doubt to derail some careers.

Poetically stated. Pretty much meaningless, but poetic nonetheless.

After all, perfection over an entire season in the bigs is unachievable.

My gym teacher said all I had to do was believe and I could achieve anything. That's why I work as file clerk in Bronson Michigan. Some dreams do come true Jimmy.

And the margin is so thin as to be maddening. The Toronto Blue Jays had the best fielding percentage last season, .988 which translates to 76 errors in 6,169 chances. Still, they finished fourth in the American League East with a 75-87 record.

Alright Mr. DeCotis, this is the worst use of statistics in any article I've ready recently. You can't possibly think that team fielding percentage is the best way to gauge a teams final record. I mean, they're not completely unrelated, but come on. At least use HR's if you're going to choose a counting stat. You obviously sorted through a bunch of stats on the MLB website trying to find one that matched your argument, and since it's baseball and there's like ten-thousand statistics, you were bound to find ONE. Not enough to justify you're position though. To prove the point that the margin of error is "maddeningly thin" I would have gone with records in 1-run games. That shows you what teams were getting lucky and which one weren't when things were close.

As Corrales said, "the ball isn't always going to bounce your way."

A brilliant analysis by the assistant of player development for the Nationals. You really dug hard to get those quotes Mr. DeCotis. Either that, or the assistant of player development for the Nationals is literally a series of inspirational quote posters on the walls of the Washington office. That I'd buy.

To that end, we aren't here to disparage.

Well, you're not here for that...

It's more of a case of respecting the game for its potential to humble, but also to celebrate those who can master it to the extent that it allows.
And no current player has done that better than Seattle's Ichiro Suzuki, who over his stellar, Hall of Fame career has posted eye-popping numbers including a .333 batting average over nine seasons with 2,030 hits in 6,099 at bats.
On the other hand he failed at the plate 4,069 times.
How can you not love a game that difficult?

Baseball is great!

Case Closed!

Rick Snider makes a classic bad move...

...by writing an article that I can tear into. It's good, cause today I had a few to choose from after a weekend of very little. I was getting worried, but today I came across about 3 articles I can, shall we say, dissect for your pleasure. Let's start with my boy Rickey, or Ricky, (I'm not sure if he prefers '-ey' or just 'y'). He's a columnist for the Washington Examiner and has some strong opinions on the hiring of Mike Shanahan. As usual his words in italics, mine in regular typeface. Here we go:

Snyder makes another classic bad move by hiring Shanahan

Make no bones about it people, Dan Snyder gets beat on by the Washington media pretty regularly. In fact, it's become such a habit I think they've pretty much forgotten all about the Nationals. Not really a surprise I guess.

Mike Shanahan is a classic move by Washington Redskins owner Dan Snyder. And, a typically bad one.

I guess Rick is not going to bother to list his other bad moves. Maybe he assumes people in Washington already know the list like:
- trading draft picks for older players
- Joe Gibbs (in retrospect)
- Steve Spurrier
- charging fans for tailgating
- baning signs made by fans

A headline-grabbing hire is great for selling season tickets, corporate sponsorships and jerseys. A $35 million contract validates the owner's reputation of overpaying for past performance. Someone with titles won elsewhere whose resume overshadows Snyder's poor stewardship once more lends hope to the Burgundy Revolution.

K this whole myth about selling season tickets with a coaching hire is unfounded. I mean, almost every NFL team sells out every home game, there's only 8 a year barring the playoffs. The only team who didn't is arguably the worst team in the league and located in the most economically depressed city in the country, the Lions. So he didn't get Shanahan just to sell tickets. Jersey's? Seriously? A lot of people running around with Bill Walsh jersey's in San Fran? Or Lovie Smith jersey's in Chicago?
Shanahan has won 3 Super Bowls (one as an offensive coordinator). He doesn't seem like a terrible choice. Maybe he's overpaid, I don't really know what an NFL coach is worth money-wise, but Rick is yet to give a solid reason why it's a bad deal.

But is Shanahan the right choice?

Did you not read your last paragraph. That's the point of the whole article.

The former Denver Broncos coach himself is 11 years from winning two straight titles. It has been a long time since both sides tasted success.

Well he brings up that it has been a while since Shanahan won a title, a valid point, maybe the game has passed him by and he doesn't know how to win in today's NFL...

So long they may have forgotten the feel of that silver trophy in their hands.

...or that. Though I'm sure the Broncos would let him hold one of the trophy's he won in the 90's if he's really forgotten.

But Snyder should have waited for a full field of candidates rather than impatiently bidding on the leader. Bill Cowher finally came sniffing around only to receive a cold reception from Snyder, who was tired of courting the former Pittsburgh coach. Between Cowher and Shanahan, I take Cowher.
If Jon Gruden could have been swayed, he's the choice. If Tennessee had been stupid enough to part with Jeff Fisher, I'd knock down anyone in the way to get him.

Apparently Rick would have hired some sort of Cerberus with the heads of Cowher/Gruden/Fisher. I can't imagine what that would have cost, but the corporate sponsorship opportunities would have been endless.

It's hard to dismiss the pick. But predecessors Marty Schottenheimer, Steve Spurrier and Joe Gibbs seemed superb choices at the time. All left mission unaccomplished. Why will Shanahan be any different?

Why would ANYONE be any different? I have no idea what Shanahan's plans are for the future of the Redskins are, but I'm scared of them thanks to Rick Snider. I'm talking Glen Beck scared...
Case Closed!