Baseball Toaster was unplugged on February 4, 2009.
Jon's other site:
Screen Jam
TV and more ...
1) using profanity or any euphemisms for profanity
2) personally attacking other commenters
3) baiting other commenters
4) arguing for the sake of arguing
5) discussing politics
6) using hyperbole when something less will suffice
7) using sarcasm in a way that can be misinterpreted negatively
8) making the same point over and over again
9) typing "no-hitter" or "perfect game" to describe either in progress
10) being annoyed by the existence of this list
11) commenting under the obvious influence
12) claiming your opinion isn't allowed when it's just being disagreed with
Walk with me, squalk with me …
The other day, Ken Arneson passed along the following at Catfish Stew:
Jay Payton has left the A's for Baltimore. He leaves Oakland as a well-liked, if not well-loved player. He did his job, played up to expectations. The thing I liked about him is that when you needed him to put the ball in play to drive home a run, he would put the ball in play and drive home the run. It was nice change from the oh-so-frustrating draw-a-walk-in-RBI-situations days of Jeremy Giambi and Erubiel Durazo. Of course, he would rarely draw a walk in an need-to-get-on-base situation, but you can't have everything.
Basically, most everything Ken writes is joyful gospel to me, but this caught me off guard. I don't know if I was supposed to take him literally, but since he was the one writing it, it naturally made me stop and think.
The distaste for the walk in an RBI situation fed many a complaint of the anti-J.D. Drew crowd, partly explaining why that crowd and I don't mingle so well (on that subject, anyway - otherwise, my Dad and I get along great!). It has basically never occurred to me that a walk in an RBI situation was bad. With runners on base, a walk keeps the inning going, sets up a potentially bigger tally and puts pressure on the pitcher – all lovely alternatives to swinging at a pitch outside of the strike zone and making out 70 percent of the time or more.
To be fair, I don't get excited to see a No. 8 hitter take a walk with a runner on third, two out and the pitcher on deck, since that pretty much kills an inning (although at least that gets the pitcher out of the way for the next inning – plus in many cases, the No. 8 hitter isn't anything to write home about himself.) And when Kelly Leak took his Chico's Bail Bonds-sponsored swing at that 3-0 intentional ball with the bases loaded against the Yankees, I was on the edge of my seat. There are exceptions to the rule.
But basically, Mongo like walks. Walks be Mongo's friend.
Clearly, some people feel differently – and the unmistakable impression I'm getting, one that I can't quite believe but appears to be true, is that more than a few people would emphatically rather see a player strike out or hit into a double play than walk in an RBI situation, I guess because that shows the player is at least trying.
It still doesn't make sense to me. A player who walks in a key situation on a close pitch is trying to help. That player isn't letting fear of scorn bother him, because taking a called strike three looks bad. If that walk doesn't lead to any runs later in the inning, why wouldn't we just place the appropriate blame on the hitter who makes the out?
Drew gets paid to drive in runs, but the next guy in the lineup doesn't?
Maybe the notion is that it wasn't fair to expect, say, a rookie like Andre Ethier, who might have been batting behind Drew, to bring home the runs when Drew gets the big bucks. But that still requires a belief that Drew is shirking his responsibility by not swinging at ball four. Given the long odds against success when swinging at a pitch that isn't a strike, that belief doesn't withstand scrutiny.
I mean, look, there's Drew, and there's Raul Mondesi, who forever etched our minds with his relentless ability to go after a questionable pitch in a critical situation. For a short time, Mondesi was my favorite Dodger, so I certainly hold no bias against him, but what approach at the plate would you prefer?
A guy like Drew – not that he should be singled out, because there are plenty of others – gets paid big bucks to help a team win. Any time he doesn't make an out, no matter who is on base, contributes to that effort. I get that people disagree with that concept, I just still don't get why.
* * *
The Baseball America article celebrating the Dodgers as Organization of the Year is live, with assistant general manager for scouting Logan White getting major credit.
The article notes that as part of his recent promotion, White has been charged with rebuilding the Dodgers' efforts in Latin America:
The Dodgers' presence in the Dominican had become so lax that they now share their complex there with Tampa Bay - which also provided them with more revenue - and the last major signing came in 2001, when the club inked shortstop Joel Guzman as a 16-year-old to a deal worth $2.25 million.
It will be White's responsibility to spearhead the team's efforts there, and he has already made several trips to the country with team owners Frank and Jamie McCourt and Colletti over the last year.
"Part of (the dropoff) is simply because the competition is so much stiffer than it was 15 or 20 years ago," White says. "We certainly recognize that we haven't been what we used to be and we are making an effort to bring back some of that luster. It's a very vital part of our organization and to just let it whither away just doesn't make any sense."
* * *
Former Dodger Thoughts wishcastees Buddy Carlyle and Steve Colyer will try to hook on with Atlanta next season with non-roster invites to Spring Training, MLB.com reports.
Carlyle made his 1999 Major League debut with the Padres at the ripe age of 21. He made seven starts that year and another four relief appearances for San Diego in 2000. Since playing in Japan during the 2001 and 2002 seasons, the 29-year-old right-hander's Major League experience has been limited to the 10 relief appearances he made in 2005 with the Dodgers.
In the 13 appearances he made at Triple-A Albuquerque this year, Carlyle was 3-1 with a 1.93 ERA.
The 27-year-old Colyer has bounced around the Minor Leagues since making 41 appearances for the Tigers in 2004. Given that he was pitching in the thin Rocky Mountain air, the 5.71 ERA he compiled for Triple-A Colorado Springs isn't too alarming. But the 48 walks he issued in 58 1/3 innings should be viewed as cause for concern.
All Jon will get will be a grandfather clock and an iguana named Jubjub.
Unless his name is Vladimir Guerrero, in which case, who cares about the strike zone?
When Bobby Abreu came to the Yankees, everyone talked about how they became a OBP machine but that is how they won all those World Series in 1990s.
I do think when a team supposedly flaunts it like some sort of magical formula like the A's or when a player making millions appears to rather walk than hack, then this approach gets attacked.
Jon, I think you are right to be mystified but I do think that walks will never be valued as the offensive weapon that they should be. BTW, the Dodgers had to have highest walk to HR ratio (offensive in the league), so there were some other guys who walked too wearing Dodger Blue in 2006.
Stan from Tacoma
For all the criticism Drew got for being too patient, he'd swing at the first pitch if it was in the zone.
Does "trying to draw a walk" mean "not swinging at pitches outside the strike zone"?
Does "trying to get the runners home" mean "swinging at pitches outside the strike zone"?
I would define it as taking extremely hittable pitches when the count is 3-1 or 2-1. Remember how Todd Zeile used to hit? That.
[12] i wasn't criticizing drew for it.
vr, Xei
--
Like your trying harder if your not working the count.
And so is Billy Beane, but probably not the way you mean.
With a runner on third and less than two outs (in a close game especially), you want your batter to make contact the first chance he gets. In other words, take a two-strike approach from the first pitch of the at-bat.
Some players, however, are incapable of changing their approach depending on the context. They can only do one or the other; they have the same approach all the time--that's all they can do.
For example, Jeremy Giambi, Erubiel Durazo, and Scott Hatteberg were of the "always-selective" types. Jay Payton is of the "always-contact" type.
The problem is that for years, the A's were overloaded with players of the "selective-only" type. It's a tie game with a runner on third, the batter gets a fastball on the first pitch, and time after time the A's player just watched it go by. It's one thing when you have one or two players in your lineup who do that, but when it's six or seven, as a fan, it can be so aggravating.
I don't have any numerical proof of this, but just anecdotally, I believe that if you can't have a batter who can change his approach during an at-bat, it's better to have a mix in your lineup: sprinkle a contact hitter here and there in-between the patience. If you walk X with a runner on third and less than two outs, Y is going to put the ball in play and get the run home.
I suppose this is all provable or disprovable with statistics, but you have to get down to the level of the count, the game context, and the type and location of the pitch to prove or disprove my hunch, because that's where my aggravation lies.
"Free agent Toby Hall isn't interested in returning to the Devil Rays on a minor league contract.
"That was funny," Hall said. "I guess it would be a minor league contract because they're a minor league team." Way to burn those bridges, Toby. The club gave you more than 2,000 at-bats even though you never once managed a 700 OPS. Your OBP for the club was under .300, and you never came close to matching the 19 homers you hit at Triple-A Durham in 2001. If the Rays weren't much more than a minor league team during your tenure, well, it's in part because you weren't much more than a minor league player."
*Or as Charlie Brown said so well,
"Don't you know sarcasm when you hear it?"*
In my opinion, players who can't walk are lame.
vr, Xei
vr, Xei
If you believe in the school of hitting as espoused by Ted Williams, the answer is no.
If you believe in the school of hitting as espoused by Vladimir Guerrero, the answer is yes.
Zai Jian, Xei
I think that's very batter-dependent. It's possible the very selective batters aren't comfortable swinging at anything outside the zone - in which case they probably shouldn't. I have to agree with Ken when he says a team of such batters might well be problematic.
Maybe you could even ride the bus to the store or something crazy like that.
Which kind of makes Shimmin's get-well wishes seem self-centered.
I'm pretty much in agreement here except to say that a hitter can afford to be selective until he reaches 2 strikes. Then you have different situation and the adage goes into effect, "If it's too close to let it go, swing."
The tension in that last phrase says it all: "working the free pass." Kinda oxymoronic, ain't it?
Andrew wants me to get better so he can (guiltlessly) resume telling everyone I hate women.
with a runner on 3rd and nobody out, it's better for the batter to get a walk than to have a run-scoring out, such as a groundout to 2nd or a sac fly.
however, with a runner on 3rd and one out, it's better to get the run in and trade an out than to draw a walk.
of course, the game situation also affects things too, so if it's a close game and say, the runner on 3rd is the winning run, then of course you want to get him home.
but a run on the board is not ALWAYS worth 2 on the bases.
so unless you need one run, walking is good.
What? Everybody else got to.
though, i don't even know why i even brought it up because i think we weren't talking about outcomes so much as we were talking about approaches.
World's tallest man saves plastic eating dolphins
I bet this guy would never see any good pitches.
8 hitter exempted walking is always good. Always.
Carry on.
Hmmph.
Not you D4P. You're not invited.
The question for the batter is: what approach should I take with this at-bat, with this next pitch, to optimize our chance of winning the game? There are so many things to take into account: the score, the outs, the baserunners, what the pitcher can throw, what the batter can hit...if the bases are loaded because of an error and two broken-bat singles, you take a different approach than if the pitcher just walked the bases loaded on 12 pitches.
For me, the complexities of these shifting contexts is the crux of the matter of what makes baseball such a beautiful game.
57 I said that just because I wanted to say "crux of the matter" again.
Oh, and three-quarters of Jon's original post, of course.
There ya go.
it'd make a good nickname too. i would love to be known as "the crux".
ken "the crux" arneson. that's pimp.
[67] btw, well said.
Sounds good. Won't see you there.
B: Some guy who gets a BB every trip to the plate.
Replace A with B and you increase run production substantially. James has written on this at some length. Also, there is no evidence that anyone can successfully increase his chances of hitting a sacrifice fly.
I can't write the word wal because my " " ey is not wor ing.
our last big signing was Joel Guzman in the early part of this decade for 2mil+.
after that, we just sort of stopped giving out huge contracts to latin free agents. instead, we focused our resources on the draft with Logan White. Now that White is spearheading the whole scouting division, maybe we'll get back into the international market.
76 - You do mean BB as in base on balls, not as in hard-hit line drive correct? So basically 2001-04 Barry Bonds?
Now that I think about this though, he may be an interesting case. Suppose there's a walk-off runner on 2B and he gets a hittable 3-1 pitch outside the zone. Does he lay off of it and have to run the bases, or does he roll over and drive it into LF to score the run and save himself a trip to first base?
74 - This final four is like the past season's LCSs, nobody worth rooting for, right? Link?
I remember seeing this in the theaters and, well, I was not entirely myself and the next day my sister asked me what it was about and I realized I really didn't know.
I don't report this with pride mind you.
Can somebody go over to Athletics Nation and tell me if top article over there is a joke or real? I'm pretty sure it's a joke.
I think.
What's that watermelon for?
I'll tell you later.
http://tinyurl.com/y63z4o
fire ned colletti if it means losing logan white.
Yet. I don't think anyone's looked at those types of issues with pitch type/location data. Until this year, I'd never seen any study using pitch type/location before.
I see two questions here:
1) Is a given player capable of adjusting the type of pitch he swings at depending on the game context, and
2) if the player can, in fact, adjust, when should he?
The joy of duty!
Where are we going?
Planet 10!
When?
Real soon!
You're mistaking the goals of, at least some of, the people that hold the "swing in an RBI situation" crowd. A DP or K is not the goal, and we don't want to see 'effort.' We want to see runs scored. Walks don't (generally) score runs. They help set them up, but someone needs a hit to drive them in and you can't hit when you don't swing.
The problem with Drew, I believe, is that people are mistaking a good approach with patience. Drew is one of the most patient hitters Ive ever seen (he's as patient as Micheal Jordan is competative). Thats not neccesarily a bad thing, just like aggresiveness at the plate isn't neccesarily a bad thing. But a good hitter, one with a good approach, know's WHEN to expand his zone and WHEN NOT to expand his zone. Guys like Mondesi just give up and expand the zone evey 2 strike count. Drew similarly, conceeds the strikezone by NOT expanding the zone in any situation.
Maybe that's just JD Drew, I can accept that. It doesn't make him a bad player anymore than it makes him a bad person (our society could probably use more restraint rather than less, so maybe Drew is the ultimate role model). Its just that Drew leaves runners on. Number three hitters aren't supposed to do that. Eight figure players aren't supposed to do that. My problem with Drew is that he's not a 'Star' player, despite what his OPS tells you. Between his durabilty and passivity, he's just not a player you build an offense around.
If his pay, and expectations, where more in line with a very-good/not-great hitter who'll play 125-145 games a year, that'd be one thing. But Scott Boras is his agent, which means he wants as good a paycheck as possible and seems to see himself as some sort of star player, which he just isn't.
I'm unaware of any studies with pitch-type data, but that would be interesting.
I would predict that the ability of any given player to adjust successfully in that fashion would be very limited or non-existent. Hitting is just too hard.
I can say "walK" now instead of BB Kause I Kot another Keyboard!
Logan White
Phil Jackson
Pete Carroll
(Ben Howland's might be a few months away from making it a four-man list)
But my two main disagreements with your comment are 1) Drew was among the best at not leaving runners on, and 2) it's not his fault he's getting paid a lot.
Bizarre
Pastiche
Character Name In Title
Independent Film
Cult Favorite
Alternative Reality
Space
Automobile
Creature
Hero
See You In Hell
Watermelon
Katana Sword
Helicopter
Sequel Mentioned During End Credits
Alien Conspiracy
Alien Contact
Alien
Chase
Cold War
Desert
Doctor
Electric Shock
Escaped Mental Patient
Flashback Sequence
Government Fraud
Hologram
Hospital
Hunting
Interdimensional Travel
Motorcycle
Musician
Name Change
New Jersey
Nightclub
Possession
Press Conference
Psychiatric Hospital
Recreational Vehicle
Rescue
Rock Band
Rocket Car
Scientist
Spacecraft Accident
Spacecraft
Surgery
Telephone Box
Torture
Trespass
U.S. President
Widower
To CHEAT!
Just kidding.
But it is Drew's fault he's getting paid a lot, otherwise he wouldn't have hired Scott Boras as his agent, otherwise he wouldn't have opted out of a guaranteed deal for $33 million.
Im not going to say there is anything morally wrong with JD for wanting as big a paycheck as possible. Nor am I trying to make any infrences on his personality. I'm just saying, if he wants to be paid like a star, I don't want him on my team and I'm going to try hard not to miss him. My guess is that Colletti feels the same way.
IMO, you can be too aggressive and you can be too passive. A good approach is the right balance between the two in regards to your hitting abilities and the situation. What I'm saying, and what many others have said in regards to Drew, is that it is possible to be too passive. If any player is too passive, it's JD Drew. (this is probably up to debate on a number of grounds, but it didn't seem like Drew changed his approach based on the situation, its like he approached each AB the same)
I can't understand the people that do not acknowledge that passivity can be a bad thing.
89 - Doesn't mean I won't watch it! Any time is a good time for womens volleyball!!
I'm only here to help.
-From the Baseball America article...
Ok.. this is getting kind of creepy. Our number one trade partner.. Our Dom Rep partner... As a wise man once said, "Show me your friends and I'll show you your future."
A: Ruth in his best year with fewer outs.
Barry Bonds?
B: Some guy who gets a BB every trip to the plate.
Eddie Gaedel?
At least you wouldn't have to worry about steroids with Gaedel.
Scoring runs generally requires baserunners.
Offered an intentional walk, would you ever refuse it?
Sorry, Bob. For tonight's game you've been declared inactive.
That being said, it is certainly a sign of a very good hitter that they can get a hit even when being pitched tightly with runners on. In general, you would want any hitter you have to be more likely to get a hit with RISP. Paradoxically, though, drawing walks with RISP is a strong indication of batter strength; pitchers willing to sacrifice the possibility of an out, which is a much greater likelihood than runners scoring, must have a good reason to do so. J.D. Drews are probably more prone to frustrate fans than Vlad Guerreros, but this does not mean that Guerrero's production contributes more to team success (assuming the two have equal linear weights values). If fans want to know which players are of greater relative value, they probably should disregard their observations of clutch performance and stick to the simple math (i.e., linear weights or other run-derived measures). You will miss a few outliers (Ortiz and Burrell, perhaps), but I've found being a baseball fan is much more fun if you don't keep trying to invent reasons to dislike good players and/or overvalue lousy players.
But keep in mind that this is in terms of what will most likely help the team win. I see no reason why a fan must ultimately seek out the strongest correspondence between their desired game outcome and their desired PA outcome. The most satisfying games to watch are not always the ones which your team wins, and I think it's reasonable for fans to root for an unfavorable short term outcome in order to build suspense over the long term. Fans who make a habit of such activity may be setting themselves up for some kind of misery, but I think it's a willingness that should be in the mix.
Ken Arneson is a) one of the best 3 internet baseball writers and b) a very entertaining person to watch baseball with. I would venture that a significant reason for each is that he's willing to submit to his more intuitive desires over his more rational desires, and that he's far from beholden to either side of that dualism.
I was scratched while healthy?
OK, so that's Ken, me, and who else?
Must be Buster Olney.
List complete!
I'm not getting paid enough, I tell you.
Also, I don't think it is true that Guzman was our last high-dollar Latin American signing. Guzman's $2.25 million was unprecedented and has yet to be equalled by another team. A $500,000 bonus for a Latin American free agent counts as high, and we gave that to Venezuela's Jonathan Figueroa, a LHP, in 2002. Figueroa has, unfortunately, turned into a bust.
And when exactly did the Dodgers decide to go back to being players in the international market? Just when Logan White was promoted? Because the international signing period was only a couple months ago, and the Dodgers did nothing while other teams ponied up some serious cash for the top amateur free agents.
I'm with Marty. I'll start watching now.
The difference between being a goat and a hero is a hero fouls back a pitch before getting another pitch that he hits and a goat pops that first pitch up to be caught. The former didn't have as good of eye hand coordination as the latter on that first pitch or was fooled more than the latter.
That brings us to Pierre and why he doesn't walk much. It is because when he does swing he more often puts the ball into play where most other players might swing and miss that same pitch and that miss ultimately leads to a walk.
I should have made this all one sentence.
121 - Totally with you, especially on that last paragraph. I guess intuitively, even though I'd always love my player to hit a homer, I'm plenty relieved as long as he doesn't make an out, generally speaking.
124/126 - The unfortunate habit of my wife working Thursday nights prevents me from almost ever seeing The Office live. There is an open chat at Screen Jam, though.
Look, I'm not sure if Drew is really as 'passive' as he seems. You can come up with evidence to support that, as you have, or evidence against that. I just can't think of him as a star. I do know, though, that he's one heck of a good player. This site is "Jon Weisman's outlet for dealing psychologically with the Los Angeles Dodgers and baseball" this is my attempt at psychologically dealing with the Dodgers loosing their best hitter. The end result WILL be me judging the loss of JD Drew as not that big a deal, regardless of you opinions to the contrary. I feel as if I can come up with an argument at any time to support this conclusion, and that makes me look forward to next season, so what?
(on a semi-related note, a professor recently insulted me by claiming I'd make a good grad-student)
Reading this is a bit like watching someone sharpen an already sharp razor. At least in this case it's not leading to statements like "remember, wherever you go, there you are."
My guess is that he was more of a Depo type. That means he was like Drew, I guess. From his stats, (which remember, Homer Simpson claimed could "prove anything that is even remotely true") he didn't control the K-zone all that well in his first season in blue, while he did a better job in his second. Unfortunatly Werth had lost his power by the time Burnett broke his wrist, so we'll just have to wait to see Jayson Werth healthy to see what he can really do. He looked good, at the plate and in the field in '04. He strikes out a fair amount, but he's the perfect 4th OF for a team with 3 regular LH outfielders. Rumors are he's going to Texas, if I recall correctly.
Werth's at bats were infuriating in 05. He swung at everything.
Tell all the LA columnists that there is now a rumor afoot that Pujols is coming to Chavez Ravine! Huzzah, Huzzah! Thanks, St.Louis, its appropriate considering they stole a WHOLE FOOTBALL TEAM from us. That's fair isn't it? (has LA achieved retrobution on St.Louis for the whole Rams episode?)
One thing, though, is that as a pitcher, I would worry about the Drew type hitter, but I would fear the guy like Vlad that I know can just hit anything. The thing is he clearly can't always hit everything well so that fear is perhaps not well founded.
The bigger story in SI avers that baseball has so much money this off-season may be just the tip of the payroll-expansion iceberg.
On V-ball: with Nebraska beating UCLA I can't even root for the team that beat mine so I could have the old "well, it took the national champs to beat us" line to live with.
Whether you like "whither" or not (and it should be "wither"), the McCourts get at least partial blame for this by reducing the team's footprint in the Dominican. Perhaps this is Logan White speaking in code.
139, yeah, 114 times, but it seemed like like he'd take two straight down the middle first and then either swing wild and K, or foul away and watch another strike come over. I might as well have been up there. Well except if I did make contact it'd been a Neifi-esque swinging bunt out.
I think if that happened, I would have to kill, in order, Ned Colletti (for doing the deal), Charlie Steiner (about a month into the season, because he cannot correctly pronounce the man's last name), and myself (for no good reason, but eluding capture seems as good an excuse as any).
What? What is it that so few people here recognize or acknowledge the Blazing Saddles references?
Or, one could ask:
Jon: what's with two Blazing Saddles references in a week? Did you watch it recently, or did one lead to another?
Yeah.
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6274400
To me, this is the crux of the issue. I mean, why is it necessarily passivity if a hitter doesn't swing at a borderline pitch? Maybe it's just the thousands of hours they spent training themselves to hit a certain way and to swing at certain pitches. It's gotta be really difficult, in that split second that a pitch approaches, to abandon all that training and swing at something that they've otherwise taught themselves will be a bad bet.
Vitor Belfort. I know he is washed up and a shell of himself and a waste of talent, but he is the guy that got me really excited about the sport.
I am also a big BJ Penn fan and GSP.
the bluejays are going to get drewed in two years.
Who are yours?
I remember when Comedy Central premiered it and they erased Jesus from the movie.
Flash to the game: Runner's on third, just stole third, in fact, with less than two out. Game's close. Pitcher's shaken. I'm telling you, he's shaken here. Crowd's up, they sense it. Drew knows it, and sets for the pitch.
His normal approach will score the guy some percentage of the time, call it 38%. I'm just making this up. It's not critical. It's not the drama.
What if Drew, keyed into the game situation, cognizant of his team standing in the dugout, eyeing his mate who just swiped that bag in a close, close play in which bone crushed and flesh tore and heart was laid bare, changed his approach? Not his swing—oh that sweet, sweet song of a swing—no, no, just his approach. What if he risks it all to score the runner? Forget the lure of power, don't even worry about getting a hit, and just try to advance one man ninety feet? Is it at all possible that he can change his profile to get a hit, say, 20% of the time, a walk 7% of the time, but score the runner, oh I don't know, 46% of the time? Sure his K-rate will likely rise as well to 28% perhaps, but is this at all possible?
This seems to be the heart of the point made in Jon's piece.
If Drew can make this alteration, then isn't it worth it? Doesn't he owe it to the crowd, his team, his craft? The game's close, remember—if that were not the case then the whole calculus may shift. But if the situation calls for it, if the real percentages prescribe a beneficial expectation, then shouldn't he do that? Shouldn't any ballplayer take that shot?
Remember, if he does this, then he will strike out more often and walk less. Probably hit more weak outs, too. That's just part of the deal, part of the life of this game. Can't have it all, even with a swing favored by an angel.
So, is a strikeout better than a walk or a hit? Of course not. May a strikeout be an indication he is changing his approach optimally, however? And, if such a change is both possible and desireable, then may a strikeout be a sign of Drew making the proper play? And may a walk be an indication he is not changing his approach, and thus making the improper play?
May that be what folks mean when they intuit that a K is better than a BB in that situation?
I agree with Ken's assessment, because I believe such a change is possible. I have no evidence for this, of course. Just feeling. Just hope, frankly. If I'm completely off base, then I'd love to learn why.
But what a swing. My my. What a sweet, sweet swing.
not exactly...
from same article..
he Jays still want to add pitching, and their signing of Wells could lead them to trade another of their outfielders, most likely Alex Rios, for a proven starter
What are the chances that Kemp stays (ie, pushes Pierre to LF) at CF. I really want him to stay in center because if he does, it the first chance the Dodgers have to a homegrown superstar since Piazza, and before him who ... Cey (who wasn't appreciated in his time) or perhaps even Snider?
OK, Ill give you Piazza, but other than him? The list gets pretty slim if youre not fond of Garvey. (I guess we should give a shout out for Pedro Guerrero, someone should put him into perspective for us 90's kids)
That particular scenario doesn't sound very likely to me. It seems that Kemp is questionable defensively in CF. That's not to say that he can't do it, but I gather that Pierre is the better defensive CF. If they're both in the lineup together, Kemp should be in LF. Assuming Kemp can play CF adequately, and becomes the starter, it would be far wiser to trade Pierre than put a pop-gun in LF.
vr, Xei
Don't get me wrong. I like Wells, big time, but Jesus. I don't think he's that type of elite/mega elite player.
Congrats to the Blue Jays for keeping him around.
Brad Penny, Andre Ethier, Mark Hendrickson for Alex Rios, Adam Lind, Brandon League
and after colletti gets rid of elders
SS Furcal age 29
CF Rios age 25
LF Lind age 23
RF Kemp age 22
1b Loney age 22
3b Laroche age 23
2b Betemit age 25
C Martin age 23
GLORIOUS DOMINATION FOR THE NEXT DECADE.
Soriano: 39.5
Drew: 26.9
C. Lee: 24.7
Wells: 23.8
A note to all those that complained about Drew. Stop. Just stop. Ned should have made a play to keep him, and if his reluctance to do so was really a result of childish anger, he is truly a petty incomp.
For Luis Gonzalez and Juan Pierre, we just should have kept Drew and had money left over.
Wow. I stink.
Besides, Gonzo doesn't block Kemp like Drew would've and since I like Kemp more than Drew that makes me happy.
Speed helps win games, occasionaly. I like Colletti's attitude though, If someone doesn't want to be a Dodger we shouldn't overpay him to stay in LA. Oh, we're supposed to pay someone extra for enjoying the sun and surf, hogwash!!! I'm going to have to pay way to much money to live in my hometown (santa barbara) and one less rich guy is only a good thing, thanx Ned!
You will get a chance to see Jose Cruz Jr this year when he comes into Dodger Stadium to play for the Pads-they signed him within the last week
My favorite players are ones that look like they are having fun and seem to smile alot--kid around some. Obviously, Gibson and Brown were not on my favorites list. But, I also like players that quietly go about their business in a calm and focused manner, always running hard and trying to make a good play while staying under control and doing what is right for the situation. Drew usually did this.
Boy, talk about your loaded statements based on speculation. The Drew complainers need to stop, but you get to keep dogging Colletti for specious reasons?
"Piss on you, I'm workin for Mel Brooks!"
Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.