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
In March, I defended Barry Bonds' Hall of Fame candidacy thusly:
Barry Bonds hit 613 home runs in his career, including 73 in 2001, before baseball prohibited steroids and began testing at the start of 2003. His performance was as permissable, however much some may want to say it was immoral, as stealing signs.Basically, though their histories aren't identical, the same line of reasoning applies to Mark McGwire. The idea of demonizing him when others - pitchers and hitters alike - operated under the steroid cloud just doesn't make sense to me.So for this period of his career, as much as I may deplore what he did, Bonds was not a cheater. J.A. Adande of the Times covered this ground this morning, capturing for the most part what I had been thinking.
Baseball let Bonds do what he pleased - failed to nip it in the Bud, so to speak - and baseball has to live with it. Bonds was a joyrider, but baseball is what let him - and others - run amok.
You can't rewrite all the history you want. You can't erase all the bad because it feels wrong. The best you can do is learn.
Barry Bonds is part of history. Baseball is a game with runs, hits and errors, and he represents all three. Let his deserved presence in the Hall of Fame be a lesson to baseball. It wasn't just Bonds. Baseball took steroids.
A broader Hall of Fame discussion is taking place on The Griddle.
* * *
I've long had a history of not allowing myself or encouraging others to use bad umpire calls as something to gripe over in a loss, even for the Dodgers. We go into every baseball game knowing that the umpires are human (oh, are they ever human), and you simply must be able to beat both the opponent and the umpires whenever necessary.
If your victory depends on an umpire's call, it's not a convincing enough victory to be worth fighting over. That's not to say that some bad calls aren't particularly painful, but given that these things tend to even out over time, it's just not worth losing your cool over. Don't be bitter - be better.
With the above in mind, though not just because of that, I find it amazing that people are still complaining about how referee mistakes cost the Oklahoma football team a victory (and in turn a possible major bowl bid) by preventing the Sooners from beating an Oregon team that is 6-5 in all other games this season.
If your season depends on the referees ensuring your victory over a team that tied for fifth place in the Pacific 10 Conference, then your season has bigger problems than the refs. Maybe the best team from the Pac-10 is just better. (And it's not as if I have great sentimental feelings for the top two teams in the Pac-10.)
The governor of Oregon is Ted Kulongoski.
As for complaining about poor officiating. I don't mind complaints about obvious errors in judgement, especially in cases where instant replay is used. I probably have the biggest beef of errors in the interpretation of the rules and you don't see that too often. My pet peeve is all the whining in the NBA whenever a foul is or isn't called. I am glad the NBA is cracking down on this behaviour with technical fouls.
vr, Xei
its absurd and insulting to fans and players
Imperfection is one of the reasons I love baseball and a little part of me would die if the umps on the field had to call games with the spectre of a replay booth hanging over their heads.
On the shortstop front, the Red Sox are said to be fading from the lead pack of suitors for free agent Julio Lugo. The New York Mets and Los Angeles Dodgers, the team that traded for Lugo during last season, are believed to be the most aggressive pursuers.
http://tinyurl.com/w6c7f
why does colletti want to bring lugo back?
I cant really believe it either but Colletti is an enigma. Like what gobears (or was it suffering bruin) said, he is an enigma wrapped in a mustache.
unless the mets sign Zito too. Then he should go to the red sox if it comes down to just those two teams.
also, why would lugo want to come back? Hes not going to unseat a better player at SS in Furcal and we need Kents bat at 2b.
Before signing pierre, I wouldnt have mind Lugo, but he just doesnt have a spot on this team now. And besides, I want those draft picks.
He can keep his fame, money and records and live a full and complete life without HOF recognition and be as much a demon as I. Welcome to the human race Mark, the paper is on the left.
well, if the red sox want kent and penny for Manny and play pedroia at SS, then okay sounds good to me.
Now, I am not naive enough to think that McGwire was not abusing steroids the way Lasorda abuses a bowl of linguini, but he has not been proven guilty of anything. Until it is established that he indeed used steroids at a time when it was against the rules of MLB, or there is at least some credible evidence to support such a conclusion, there is no basis for excluding him.
Moreover, if you exclude McGwire for "suspected" use where do you draw the line? Was Clemens using? Many think so, and his rising stats as he aged suggest as much. How about our own "Game Over". Many, including me, have speculated that his spike from mediocricy to dominance back down to injury riddled was fueled by steroid use. Many have posited that Nomar's power and subsequent brittleness was the product of performance enhancers. Denying a qualified player admission to the HOF based on a complete lack of evidence is the first step down a very slippery slope.
I don't know why the Dodgers would be wanting to trade Furcal. Furcal for Manny?
But not as preposterous as adding Lugo with the Corresponding Move being "subtracting Guzman"
I guess we are looking at it differently. I'm comparing "Adding Lugo in exchange for his salary and Guzman" with "Adding Lugo in exchange for his salary," and finding the former to be more "preposterous."
"Needing Lugo" needn't justify "Trading Guzman for Lugo". I was not a big Guzman fan, but I'm not willing to give Ned the benefit of the doubt in thinking that Lugo was the best possible return for Guzman.
Wolf, who played at Pepperdine and Woodland Hills El Camino Real High, accepted a one-year deal for $7.5 million with a vesting option for another year based on 180 innings pitched. There is also a club option in the event Wolf doesn't pitch enough innings to trigger the vesting option.
great terms for the dodgers
The Dodgers also are pursuing a power hitter, most likely through a trade. They have had discussions with the Boston Red Sox regarding left fielder Manny Ramirez, but the asking price has been too high. According to a source, the Red Sox want three players, including budding slugger Matt Kemp, the top outfield prospect in the organization.
it sounds like maybe Kemp is safe from the words henson choosed to describe him. Or im probably just reading into it as optimistically as possible.
And D4P, you might be trying to prove a point, but please stop trying to act like the current Lugo situation is the same as when we traded for him, you just come off as very stubborn.
But that's as far as I want to get into the politics of it.
*their
I'm going to make a John Madden quality prediction that Pierre will look better than LA in Julio Lugo, but Marlon Anderson will probably hit more home runs as a Dodger than Pierre.
Well, except for the Knight of Rottingham from Robin Hood: Men in Tights
The boy has strange value prioritization though. Cheating is good; lie about cheating is bad. He could be a new folklore hero on par with old pal George and his cherry tree if he would only fess up completely and go on to actually help the situation (psst don't follow the path of former bud, present betrayer Cansaco). If it carried any weight, I'd sanction his ascendance then.
In any case, this is me covering my ears and blocking out all this Lugo talk. Only bad things can come of it.
Now back Maddux, this is how ridiculous the criticism otherwise is. Maddux and 2mil for Guzman and Pedroza. Izturis for Lugo. Is that so bad? Izturis otherwise only went to Chicago because they didn't need Guzman and Pedroza but a major league shortstop. If the Cubs had needed two young outfielders, we'd have given them Guzman and Pedroza and still have Izturis and so you'd have likely never seen Lugo in a Dodgers uniform. And with Kent and Nomar both down and out at the time, there was a need to replace Izturis. So think of it that way, since that is what it was. And if Guzman never does squat, and he might very well not ever do squat, then that one Lugo grounder to short will be more than he's ever done.
32 Furcal for Manny? God, I hope not. I don't otherwise think that they'd want just Furcal, as they will probably want Broxton as well. And with our man Saito not having declared if and when he'll make his triumphal return...
You have been warned.
I agree with the fact that Oklahoma partly has themselves to blame for the loss, but all things considered they deserved to win that game.
also: i see where the times is losing its best (in my opinion) sports reporter/writer in tim brown. who do you think takes over the MLB beat now? i vote for weisman...
I am not a Lugo fan so the idea of swapping Furcal with Lugo does not appeal to me.
But, swappping Kent for Lugo works for me. I think the Angels would like to have Kent's bat in their lineup and would find a place for him. It could be first or DH or even second giving Kendrick another year before he plays full time.
The Dodgers would want a pitcher from the Angels in return.
I watched that Oregon/OU game and OU did get hosed on that call...but OU let Oregon score after the recovery. Its not like Oregon recovered the kick and, poof, game over.
OU even had a chance to win the game with a late field goal, regardless of the bad onside kick call, but couldnt convert.
I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Ned felt like there is as much need for Lugo now as there was then. It looks to me as if Lucille II is the backup shortstop. The fact that Lugo was acquired in the first place (rather than using Lucille II) seems to indicate that Ned didn't really want Lucille in the starting lineup. As the roster stands now, if Furcal gets hurt, Lucille would presumably be next in line for the SS throne. Unless Ned has changed his mind, why would he now be more comfortable with Lucille II than he was last season?
I guess I'm just figuring that, like last year, Nomar won't play anywhere other than 1B. But I suppose anything's possible.
http://allthingsblue.blogspot.com/
Does everyone agree with this forecast? Given the somewhat modest numbers expected, should we be looking to sell high this offseason by including him in a deal for Manny or Burrell?
Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.