Burright and Harkness would be both be traded to the Mets after the season. Burright was often brought in for defensive purposes late in games in 1962. He made a crucial error in the ninth inning of Game 165 against the Giants.

Harkness's greatest moment as a big leaguer likely was on June 26, 1963, when he hit a game-ending grand slam in the 14th as the Mets beat the Cubs 8-6.

And Harkness and Burright were traded to the Mets for Bob Miller, the losing pitcher in the game for the Mets in this game.

As always, thanks for the added background!

Every time I hear the name Harkness, I keep thinking it's former City Section commissiner Hal Harnkess.

Larry Burright was probably the last Dodger player to have the nickname "Possum".

What a marvelous find. Any Vin Scully from that era is a treasure, but Vinny describing Sandy's first no-hitter is an absolute joy to hear. To have Vin's call of the 9th inning 2 of the 4 Koufax no-hitters has to bring a smile to any Dodger fan.

Stan from Tacoma

Comment 5 did not really violate any rules, but it brought up a subject that has no value being discussed here.

6 - You were the first one I thought of when I heard the news, Stan.

Thanks Jon. I feel as elated as Warren Giles after game 4 of the 1963 World Series.

Stan from Tacoma

7.

ok... sorry, I was just wondering.

"It may sound corny, but I enjoyed listening to Vin call a game almost more than playing in them. He's been a special broadcaster for a lot of years and he's been wonderful to listen to for a lot of years. He definately is the All Century broadcaster as far as I am concerned."

Thanks to Baseball Almanac for the Sandy Koufax quote about Vin Scully. The best pitcher I have ever seen talking about the best broadcaster I have ever heard.

Stan from Tacoma

"melifluousness"

Tell the truth, am I the only one who had to look this up?

44 years ago? Oh my goodness. I wonder if I heard it; we still lived in LA that summer.

I can't figure out why I didn't hear it. At the time I was living in Wilmington, Delaware and could listen to Met games over WABC day or night. I didn't miss many broadcasts of Dodger/Met or Dodger/Phillies games during those years, but I did not listen to the Koufax no hitter I am sure. I did listen to all 9 innings of Sandy's no hitter against the Phillies in 1964. The Koufax perfect game aginst the Cubs I missed. WGN radio had a very spotty signal and I was not able to listen to very many Dodger/Cub games during that era.

Stan from Tacoma

Needless to say, I was not able to listen to the Koufax no hitter against the Giants. No way a signal would travel from LA or San Francisco to Wilmington, Delaware.

Stan from Tacoma

Thanks Jon, and a belated happy holidays to the entire DT community!

but....Frank Thomas on the Mets??

(it doesn't need saying but I will anyways: how did Mr. Vin manage to find that list of no-hitters with neither Retrosheet nor Bob T?????)

17
Allan Roth

Can anyone tell me why I can e-mail pictures from my Treo but not video? I get a message that says "Please check you have a default email application which supports attachments." Since I can send picture attachments, I don't get what the deal is.

7 How come I always show up too late to find out what gets deleted? Curiosity is such a powerful thing.

20
You don't want to know. Finding out will unleash a horrible secret into the world that will cause millions of people to die and at least six cats to meow. 300 hobos will then take over your town.

21 I thought my hobo-karma was intact when I didn't say anything while a bum slept under my apartment's car port for a few days. Those cats meowing however...

19- Maybe. It looks as though it might just not work, natively, but that there is a workaround; have you tried attaching the video file to an email, using the email client (chattermail?), instead of trying to send it directly from the video application?

http://discuss.treocentral.com/showthread.php?t=104187

It's too bad Melky Cabrera isn't faster than he is. Or it's too bad that Colletti wants a CF faster than Cabrera is. Either way. Or is Melky a flash in the pan? I have to admit, it's possible I only like him because of his name.

16 but....Frank Thomas on the Mets??

Heh, Frank Thomas, along with Richie Ashburn, was one of the few bright spots on that '62 Mets team. He hit 34 homers. No one else hit more than 16.

Well I knew the Big Hurt has been around for as long as I've been following baseball but didnt think he was quite that old... ;)

The Dave Roberts that just signed with the Giants is not really in his late 30s. He's actually the reincarnation of several other Dave Roberts, most of whom have played for the Padres at some time.

And a shower of blue pillows down on the field.

That really brings back memories. Tossing the Dodger cushion onto the field at the end of the game, which I think were 25 cents, was one of the things I looked forward to when going to Dodger Stadium in the 60s.

In a related story, David Smith (of Retrosheet) has audio of his perfect game:
http://www.udel.edu/PR/UDaily/2005/dec/smith122004.html

And the passage in question:
=====
Smith, originally a consultant to author Jane Leavy, became a part of her book Sandy Koufax: A Lefty's Legacy.

As it turns out, Smith has what is possibly the only audiotape of the broadcast of Koufax's perfect game. The book notes that he had a choice between staying home and listening to the game or seeing off a girlfriend who was heading to college. He chose the girl but left a reel-to-reel tape recorder running so he could listen to the game when he returned home, and Leavy weaves the tale of the tape through the book.

"By freak chance, I have an audiotape of the perfect game," Smith says. "No one else in the world has it. I have sent copies of it to Sandy Koufax and to Vin Scully, who called the game."
=====

24. Andrew Shimmin It's too bad Melky Cabrera isn't faster than he is. Or it's too bad that Colletti wants a CF faster than Cabrera is. Either way. Or is Melky a flash in the pan?

I think you have already answered your own question. How can he be a flash in the pan when, as you stated, Colletti thinks he is too slow.

Could Koufax get credit for another no-hitter due to not hitting Marichal and was Koufax so fast that Roseboro already had the ball in his mit before Marichal swung and therefore Marichal had no choice but to swing through Roseboro to hit the ball.

23 - What is chattermail?

http://www.chatteremail.com/

{30} Koufax did not hit many batters, or even move hitters off the plate. The pitch he threw to Marichal was high, but it was not inside.

Stan from Tacoma

Koufax hit 18 batters in his career, no more than 5 in any one season, which happened to be 1965.

Don Drysdale hit 20 guys in 1961 alone.

Don Drysdale hit 20 guys in 1961 alone.

Is that only during baseball games, or just in general?

Allright Bob -- here's a research question should you happen to be sitting around bored on the County's dime. My son has asked if Phillipe Petit still walks on high wires, and if he doesn't, what was his last walk.

I found a post-9/11 article in which he was quoted as saying that, if the towers are rebuilt, he will walk again. But haven't found any follow up.

I don't work for the County.

Oh good grief!

Thanks for the info Bob. I am surprised his high for hit batters was in 1965; I figured it would be when he was in Brooklyn or his early years in LA.

Stan from Tacoma

38
Check your email.

39
Koufax pitched the most innings of his career in 1965. 335!

40 Wow. Thanks very much to you, and to the entire City of Angels.

42
You are most welcome. Don't let your son become a tightrope walker. If you do, don't expect me to watch.

33 Koufax did not hit many batters, or even move hitters off the plate.

That is what impresses me the most about Koufax. Hitters dug in against him without fear of being intentionally hit or knocked down and he still pitched 4 no-hitters.

Ryan might have pitched more ho-hitters but hitters were anything but digging in against him. If someone got a hit against Gibson they most likely had to duck a pitch high and in thier next time up.

That said, nothing was more entertaining than watching Drysdale leer at a hitter that backed out to tie his shoe laces and then wait for the batter to step back in to hit only to watch Drysdale step off the mound to untie and retie his shoe laces. If Drysdale's next pitch was a low and away slider I don't think that pitch was ever hit in that situation.

You know how obits for major figures are largely pre-written. '

Well, the Wash Post's obit for President Ford contains an editors note explaining that one of the credited authors of the obit himself passed away in January 2006.

37 I don't work for the County.

Nor do your co-workers

36 Allright Bob -- here's a research question should you happen to be sitting around bored on the County's dime

Is Bob on Food Stamps?

I enjoy hearing Vin Scully anytime. It's impossible to hear or see anything form the West Coast because of the FCC and the various sports leagues inability to join the 21st century. I live in a zone that is not in any one market. I can reach St Louis,Chicago, Minneapolis, Milwaukee, and Kansas City within 7 hours by car. For this, I have a difficult time accessing any games(in many sports)by radio or TV. Blackouts and market protection are ridiculous given the vast populations that reside outside markets. Enough of my digression, but on a similar note...even with broadband, the buffering from the MLB site made for a less than pleasant listening experience. I understand that MLB is trying to protect property, but it would be nice to be able to save the audio file for future, non-buffered enjoyment.

"Everyone considered him the coward of the county."

"No, I work for the city."

"Sorry, my mistake. Everyone considered him the coward of the city."

"Everyone said he ate worms and sassed him mom."

"No, I don't sass my mom."

"Sorry, my mistake. Everyone said he ate worms."

Am I getting this right?

50 - I'm not sure, since I can't tell if you're getting my reference to the Kenny Rogers classic.

45
Bob Hope outlived his New York Times obit writer.

My dad was at this game.

OT - Kobe Bryant asked who's Benedict Arnold when he was asked to comment on Shaq's usage of that name when Shaq commented about what Phil Jackson said earlier about the O'Neal's work habits.

Obviously, Kobe never watched the Brady Bunch episode featuring Peter Brady as the Arnold and missed the only death scene that I can recall in the history of the Brady Bunch.

See what happens when you grow up in Italy.

I have a friend who collects baseball tickets, in particular Barry Bonds HR tickets. (I have already tried to convince him that porn and crack would be healthier vices). He is missing a few games that took place at Dodger Stadium and has asked me to ask you all whether any of you saved tickets you would be willing to sell. (He is usually willing to pay a good price.) The games he has inquired about include:

July 5, 1986, Pirates @ Dodgers;
June 21, 1991, Pirates @ Dodgers;
July 13, 1996, Giants @ Dodgers;
July 13, 1997, Giants @ Dodgers;
July 2, 1999, Giants @ Dodgers;
July 3, 1999, Giants @ Dodgers; and
July 21, 2000, Giants @ Dodgers.

Thanks in advance for any help in pursuit of this unworthy endeavor.

54 - I noticed that Benedict Arnold apparently had to be explained and truly found that hard to believe. I can understand someone not knowing the details, but was the implication that Kobe had never heard of him?

56
Kobe Bryant may have grown up part of his life in Italy, but he graduated from high school in Philadelphia. Presumably, a U.S. history course was required.

And since Benedict Arnold was a Revolutionary War figure, there's no way they would have skipped over him in the curriculum. Unlike World War II or Korean War or Vietnam War figures.

I think the teaching of history in American schools really fell off in the 80s/90s. I've never known anything about history, and I was always a pretty good student.

I probably wouldn't know who Benedict Arnold was myself if not for The Brady Bunch.

57 - Besides he has passed into the popular lexicon as evidenced by Shaq's usage of the phrase: "He's a Benedict Arnold".

Kobe was always considered smarter than the average Memphis Grizzly, so this story gives me pause.

Any word on what the Dodgers plan to do with the recording, besides making an excerpt available over the intarweb? If they were to publish the whole thing on audio CD, I know at least a couple of people who will be getting it for Xmas or their birthdays next year (as long as they don't charge up the nose and deep into the sinuses for it... but maybe even if they do)?

58 - I had a conversation with Thomas Fleming (editor of "Chronicles Magazine") where he told me that education in general had collapsed in this country. In the 50s everyone who graduated had a background in Latin, knew the history of Rome, ect, now kids who can read are considered success stories.

Of course, he is a classics major (from UNC) and a general malcontent, so I didn't take him too seriously.

57 I think Bob's faith in the U.S. educational system is a little stronger than mine. I'd be surprised if more than 25% of the people I went to high school with knew, say, which war Benedict Arnold was involved in. Although I concede they probably would have at least heard the name.

I think a lot of kids get turned off to history because the way it's taught tends to be memorization of random dates and names without any explanation of broader concepts or why it's important.

58
Speaking as the proud possessor of a 5 on the AP US History exam in 1982, I think that some US history has been taught in public schools.

I even took a practice exam while listening to Game 5 of the 1981 NLCS through a hidden earphone. Got an A on it too, although I am still unsure if I inadvertently included Ray Burris's name in the essay.

Was he prominent in Colonial New England?

61. Well, as someone who has been teaching in the UC system for 18 years (and was a student for 4 more before that), I can attest to that - at least for California schools. Every year, I find that the freshmen show up knowing less and less. I'd be willing to bet that their IQs are exactly the same as 20 years ago, but they just haven't learned anything. The top students, who are very smart, have never been challenged. Having always received straight As, however, they THINK they've learned a lot.

Then, to make matters worse, with Wikipedia avaialable as one-stop shopping, most of them (even in the social sciences and humanities) will graduate without ever setting foot in a library. Sorry, Bob.

The nearly impossible task of reporting historical fact without ever offending anyone has also made it hard to teach the subject in an interesting or meaningful way, I think.

64
Hey, I don't mind if they don't show up. But at LAPL, we promise a taser-free environment.

65 - When you get to college, History becomes a lot more interesting because you start to learn the why instead of just what happened.

I can name every President in order (and I used to be able to name 20-30 Roman Emperor's starting with Julius Caesar), but not because I memorized a list. I learned the greater thread of history and where those people fit in and then it wasn't just memorization.

I think the real crime is the English departments that shove horrible politically correct "classics" down kids throats and make them think reading is boring. I had to read Miss Jane Pittman, Cold Sassy Tree ect, but never had to crack Huck Finn, wonder why?

So, we're going to find out who was juicing in 2003?

http://www.nbc11.com/news/10616989/detail.html

At first I thought Shaq was making Red Auerbach reference but that would involve some knowledge about Auerbach's given name which is Arnold and I don't think Shaq would ever be that subtle.

I learned the names of all the US presidents because we got little collector's statues of them at our grocery store and my brothers and I would form them into football teams and play mock games with them.

Nobody wanted Lyndon Johnson because we accidentally broke off his right arm.

OT (Benedict Arnold and history, that is):

Rumors are surfacing in NY that Ned is interested in dealing for Randy Johnson.

*According to the official, the Bombers might be willing to kick in part of Johnson's $16 million salary for 2007 if it meant they would get better players in the deal...

The Dodgers are also believed to be involved in talks about Johnson. Hong-Chih Kuo, the Taiwanese lefty who started Game2 of the NLDS against the Mets, could interest the Yanks.*

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/story/483406p-406909c.html

To complete the circle, the Benedict Arnold Wikipedia entry now concludes with these words.

"Benedict Arnold" has become an American expression used to describe traitors and remains widely recognized as such even in 21st century America.

The term is thus an American equivalent to calling someone a Quisling. From a British perspective, he is considered a patriot, though according to many sources the British never fully trusted him.[citation needed]He also attempted later to start a shipping company, which failed. He later died virtually unknown.

For example, Shaquille O'Neal of the NBA's Miami Heat recently used the term to describe former coach Phil Jackson.

I remember being forced in fourth grade to memorize the entire text of the Gettysburg Address. We were graded on how many words we got wrong. And there was no explanation of what it was, why it was given, or why it was considered important. Just memorization.

67 I used to infuriate one of my high school English teachers because instead of writing "English IV" on all my papers like we were supposed to, I'd write "Dead White Male Authors IV."

The Dodgers are not getting Randy Johnson.

The whole problem of Shaq calling Phil Jackson "Benedict Arnold" is that it makes no sense. Who was Jackson betraying? Was he giving out the Lakers secrets to another team?

Hey, I don't mind if they don't show up. But at LAPL, we promise a taser-free environment.

It's funny you mention that. When that happened, my first reaction was surprise that so many students (or non-students) were in the library at the time.

74
And there is great rejoicing in the land!

yea!

Allright then smarties, step up to to the recent history plate:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16073858/

(I got an 82.)

67. And that is why in my opinion, the smartest kids are actually smarter and better educated than in the past, they don't waste as much time in history classes on meorizing dates or on historical footnotes like Benedict Arnold, who in the long run meant nothing.
I was in school during the transition time between just cramming in facts like the monthly order of all of the Revolutionary War Battles and the Preamble to the Constitution when I was in the 5th grade. I move out of the US and came back for High School and memorizing those facts was nothing, it was all about learning the behind the scenes and the why's and the critical thinking and applying them to the facts. That is what I loved about the US AP history test I got a 5 even though I had a momentary brain fart and referred to the Lusitania and the Lufthansa in the essay portion because the focus was more showing that you understood history rather than just memorized it, and I've seen much more focus on that and on the murkiness of historical scholarship even at the high school level than there previously was.

73. Ooh, edgy. Can I get a ruling, Mr. Shimmin?

70 Appropriate today. I'd ask if you guys fought over Gerald Ford, the President who played football best, but he was probably the actual President at this time and maybe not so likely to be in the grocery store collector set.

78 Argh! 80%! On the other hand, one of my errors was the Britney Spears-KFed (Fed-Ex?) divorce citation, so I can be proud that I didn't know that, at least.

I'm ashamed to say I got 92%. My only news comes from The Economist, The Daily Show, and you all. I never watch TV news, and only link to news websites if I'm looking for details on something I've heard about from some other source.

Granted, some of my correct answers were guesses (Oscars? Britney?) and most of the questions were trivia, but I'm still ashamed that I did so well.

I missed the name of the boat, the name of the church, the reason for the name of the fire, and the one I'm actually surprised about - the victim of Ann Richards's rapier wit (right family, wrong individual).

83. I guess what that really tells me is that the fake news on the Daily Show actually covers the same material as MSNBC thinks is important. That's depressing.

84 - Because the Daily Show is more concerned with humor than the moment they sometimes show things that MSNBC misses. I notice that they will compare something Bush or Tony Snow said today with something they said in the past to usually hilarious conclusions. CNN, MSNBC and Fox just feed the days "news" into the spin machine.

83 Methinks the Lady doth protest too much . . .

(Kidding -- but I'm impressed anyhow.)

I missed Ann Richards, though it was voter error as a I had intended to vote for the other Bush. Missed the Oscars, the Cruise Ship, Tiger's Majors. I might have missed the World Cup second place team, but the question a few down gave the answer to that one! I also outsmarted myself on Steve Irwin and Britney/KFed, rejecting my first instinct because it was too obvious and I figured 'em to be trick questions.

80% for me but a lot of answewrs were best guesses, if it was a fill in the blank test, I would have been in big trouble.

81
The set ended with Nixon.

As for the MSNBC test, like the film with Sean Penn, "I am Sam." I got an 82.

80- Pfff. Yeah, maybe if doing homework could ever be considered edgy. I guess it's possible, though none of my attempts ever worked out. I came very close to being suspended from school over the way I decided to fill in an essay exam for Les Miserables. I'm still a little surprised the teacher really read the thing; I'd have bet big money that she didn't bother with that. Though, maybe her student aide read it to her. High school rots brains.

36 38 40 42

Meh... City, County, State... They all seem to run together to me...

86 - I definitely outsmarted myself a few times (Steve Irwin) on the way to a lackluster 74% (I did get Brit/KFed because it is always irreconcilable differences). A lot of the questions (other American Grand Slam Winner, commuter branch of what airline) are only tangentially related to 2006. Sour grapes after a mediocre score and all that.

90 Yes, but what about . . . District?

I also protest that there were more questions about soccer and no questions about Jim Bowden.

92 I'm an optimist.

Hope for bloggers, Jenna Jameson's latest beau, some boxer, met her via MySpace when she requested to be his friend.

93- Yeah, but even I got the soccer questions, and I hate soccer. They gave you the answer to the first soccer question, in the second soccer question.

90%- I missed both of the golf related questions along with the Anna Nicole Smith one, the cruise ship, and Britney's divorce. I'm kind of mad about the last two as I had the correct answer for both and then changed them for no particular reason.

If they outlaw six-toed cats, only outlaws will have six-toed cats!

http://tinyurl.com/yhmarn

Somewhat creepy story up on the Griddle.

I did so poorly that I even missed one of the two baseball questions.

Hope for bloggers, Jenna Jameson's latest beau, some boxer

He's not "some boxer," he's Tito Ortiz, mixed-martial-artist.

101 Sorry for the throw away tag, did not catch his name.

101 - Who? What? Mixed marital artist? Like Peggy Lipton and Quincy Jones?

103 - Oh, you mean human cockfighting.

lets talk about sickels dodger prospect rankings.

we havent touched based on that subject nearly enough.

96 Oooooooh, Vishal's not gonna like that.

105 Really what is there to say about Sickels rankings, besides that they are a sham of a mockery of a disgrace of a travesty?

He continues to underrate the Dodger farm system as he has for years. He was always low on Kemp, LaRoche, Loney, Miller, all guys with incredible upside. I think he may focus too much on midwest and east coast teams to the exclusion of the West.

104
It is actually safer than boxing. So boxing is more human cockfighting.

I don't really take much issue with Sickels' list other than that he appears to significantly overrate Hu and Dunlap. (Which is kind of odd considering that their respective tools are diametrically opposite; they have nothing whatsoever in common.)

107 - I think he overrates some prospects in the Dodger system and the only people he overrates are pitchers with bad peripherals, hitters who aren't above the low A's and relief pitchers- with good reason. I think Elbert, Miller and Bell could have higher ratings, but I can see why he gave them the ratings he did.
Plus, he said the Dodgers had the best farm system in baseball last year.

108 - I am just referencing John Mccain. I personally don't watch it because it seems pointless and brutal (like the NFL without the cheerleaders). But by all means, beat the crap out of each other to your hearts content (or just watch others do it).

109 - When their powers combine...

I think Sickels was just rushed this year and so it was probably harder for him to do research on a team in the west like the Dodgers.

Hu has no business being the #5 prospect in our system and Dunlap has no business being the 11th best prospect in our system. I know the Pioneer league was down this year but being the #2 ranked prospect in that league should garner more then a C+.

It just seems he didnt put that much thought in it, thats all.

111 109 - When their powers combine...

Destructively or constructively?

here were his grades from last years rankings...

Chad Billingsley, RHP, Grade A-

Joel Guzman, SS-3B-OF, Grade A-

Andy LaRoche, 3B, Grade B+

Jonathan Broxton, RHP, B+

Russell Martin, C, B+

Scott Elbert, LHP, B+

Blake DeWitt, 3B, B+

Chin-Lung Hu, SS, B

Andre Ethier, OF, B

Justin Orenduff, RHP, B

Etanislao Abreu, 2B, B-

Delwyn Young, 2B, B-

Travis Denker, 2B, B-

Matt Kemp, OF, B- (grade change from C+ in the book)

Blake Johnson, RHP, B-

Hong Chi Kuo, LHP, B-

James Loney, 1B, C+

Justin Ruggiano, OF, C+ (grade change from B- in book)

Anthony Raglani, OF, C+

Josh Wall, RHP, C+

He just went with prospects he seemed to know and did not research much beyond that. It was preliminary so maybe there is a chance he will change some things after he reviews comments.

Nate, what do you think about your former boy Denker. He is horrible in A+ ball, even though he keeps an IsoPatience above .1. Do you think he is just a low A hitter who can't hit for enough average to make it, or does he still have time at 21?

114 - Well it is either form of Jason Phillips at first base or Miggy Tejada at short.

I am not sure why anyone wants Randy Johnson. He is about to have a second back surgery and I would not be surprised to see him forced into retirement after or during the season.

117

Yea denker is a big mystery to me. I mean, his numbers and rates in low A as a 19yr old were amazing and to just crumble and plain suck after being promoted is really puzzling. At first i thought it was just a slump but after a while, you just have to let go and drop expectations.

82% on the quiz.

Supreme Court, ship, turnpike, Tiger, airline, tennis, Irwin, bloodless coup, last state Senate Dems took.

Are people supposed to know these things? Could you win money on Jeopardy™ knowing the answers to these questions?

121 From having talked to a couple of former contestants, I gather that the best way to win on Jeopardy is to master the buzzing system beforehand. Most of the players know the answers to most of the questions, so the one who has the perfectly timed buzz-in is the one who wins a lot of money.

122 - Do you buzz in at the beginning of the question or at the end? In other words, could you buzz in at the beginning of every question and hope that you knew the answer by the time Alex finished reading?

When I had DVR I recorded every episode of Jeopardy and my roommates and I would play it all the time.

123- Not till Alex has finished reading the question.

http://www.ken-jennings.com/faqjeopardy.html#buzzer

123 In order to make it a watchable television show, you have to buzz in after the question has been completely read. So the people who do best at Jeopardy are the ones who are most attuned to the timing of the person whose job it is to push the button that allows people to buzz in.

122 Cool. So having the buzzing skills of a monkey can earn you big bucks? Jeopardy's status has been significantly lowered in my world.

More Randy innuendo, culminating with this amusing aspersion to Boras:

I am guessing Scott Boras doesn't do anything with Zito until he determines the level of Yankee interest [in Randy]. A bidding war between the Mets and Yankees? That would absolutely be icing on Beelzebub's already very successful off-season.

I'm not advocating the Dodgers get Randy. However, I am hoping that the names "Randy Johnson" and "Darren Dreifort" become synonomous if the Pads pick him up

Link: http://www.sportsfrog.com/2006/12/the_randy_johnson_trade_chatte.php

Apparently, when you do Jeopardy they give you a book with all the questions and answers. Of course, it is so large that is basically impossible to remember, but they do have some help.

128. Now that destroys my faith in the show. I don't care how large the book is, in my world, potential Jeopardy questions are infinite.

124 - Ken Jennings is pretty funny on his website.

Found the Ninth Circuit's steroid decision. It's a hundred and fifteen pages long.

http://tinyurl.com/y6q64p (PDF WARNING)

129 - That is a joke I think. All of the questions and answers to what? All of the possible answers and questions, which is to say infinite questions and answers? All of the questions ever asked on the show? Which wouldn't necessarily help you. All the questions on that nights show? Which would help you way way too much. Besides, you really think they go to the trouble of printing thousands of pages per contestant (400 or more a year)?

128: I don't believe that.

Re my comment about the Post's Ford obituary being written by a dead guy, it turns out that more visitors to the Post web site are viewing the dead writer's obit than the Ford obit.

http://tinyurl.com/wcrxt

We had a family friend on the show and some TA's in UCSB film knew a producer's son. So that is how I was told about the book. I believe it is all the possible questions for the season.

134: But, but, what would Rob Morrow say!

126 - If it's true the Dodgers even showed interest in the DU "Diminishing Unit", then Dodger fans should break into Ned's office and gag him and handcuff him to keep him from making a colossal mistake. Let the
Snakes or the Friars take their chance on a 43 year old pitcher with a balky back. Actually DU would fit perfectly with the aging NoCals, what's one more senior citizen up there? Randy back in 1997 was worth pursuing but we lost him to the Snakes and we desperately throw the whole kit and kabootle at Kevin "Loads of fun" Brown. A decade later and costing $16 mil is not worth it, Ned!! Resist the temptation. We have enough SP, we need an extra bat if anything.

They talked about it during our history of television class. I pretty much lost all respect for Jeopardy after hearing that. Maybe, it it a more recent thing or an old thing I have no idea.

I agree with Jon. There is no way Ned will give up good prospects for Randy Johnson. I bet he might have checked just to see if his value was extremely low.

Anyone know where Johnson ranks on Ned's "Best Left-handers in the American League" list...?

You can see all the answers and questions from previous seasons (link below), but there's no way they give contestants a book of the A&Q's for any of the shows they'll appear on.

http://www.j-archive.com/

140 Yeah, I don't believe that for a second. When networks give game show contestants the answers ahead of time, doesn't it generally turn into a scandal of Ralph Fiennes-like proportions?

I got 68%. I will now commit Seppuko.

Or Sudoku.

141
Exactly when it was brought up in class. Had a lecture on quiz show scandals then they just went on about how game shows are horribly manipulated. Maybe they got some info mixed up but that is what I was told.

Yeah, well, maybe. But then again, lying can be a useful pedagogical technique.

Having a teacher lie to someone about a scandal that was based entirely on deceiving people is something that is hard to figure out.

That's just what they want you to think.

145 - "Notes on a Scandal," now in theaters.

147
I just read the review of that at lunchtime.

But I will defer any questions about it for fear of angering the Xeifrank monster.

148

A: A pathetic waste of time when one could be talking about the rate 2 of Jeff Kent.

Q: I wonder what Xei thought of Quiz Show?

148 - Tyranny of the minority.

Cool audio of the Koufax no-no! He ended up with 3 groundball outs in the 9th of his first no-no and striking out the side in the 9th of his perfecto! Some difference. Any history on what he did in his 2nd and 3rd no-no's in the 9th? It would be bizarre if it was a natural progression, 2nd no-no he strikes out 1 in the 9th and 2 in the 9th of his 3rd no-no.
138 - That's a relief. I guess he wouldn't be doing his job if he didn't check out the market price. I just wouldn't want him to even be tempted to go off the track.
BTW, What will be the over/under on how many games played before Hillenbrand wears out his welcome in Anaheim? Or challenges Scioscia to a fight? :)
70 games, 90 games? :)

Will there be an Emerald Bowl chat on the Griddle?

151 Retrosheet says...

1964: Amalfitano made an out to first; Pagan made an out
to center; MCCOVEY BATTED FOR PREGENZER; McCovey walked; Kuenn
grounded out (pitcher to first); 0 R, 0 H, 0 E, 1 LOB.

1965: Taylor struck out; Amaro popped to first in foul territory; WINE BATTED FOR CULP; Wine struck out; 0 R, 0 H, 0 E,
0 LOB.

153 I had the years wrong there, as I'm sure it took everyone about 2 seconds to figure out.

152
No there won't although you can use the Rose Bowl part two for that function.

I'm happy to bring up the rear at 60% on the 2006 quiz. Sadly, most of the answers I knew came from the random news I get during Kevin and Bean in the morning and occasional Daily Show tidbits. It's safe to say that I could care less about most politics and current events.

I would be a pretty good Jeopardy contestant if there weren't so many literature questions. When the breadth of your knowledge is the books you read the Cliff's Notes of in high school, you're in trouble. I usually dominate any of the wordplay categories though (along with sports, movies, music, and most science).

So Harvey Kuenn was the last out in two of Koufax' no-hitters. Interesting.

153 -Thanks. No matter, you answered my question. No natural progression. First 2 no-hitters he did not get a K in the 9th, last two no hitters he got 2 K and then 3 K in the perfecto. I wish he got one K in the 2nd because that would have been kind of cool.
Go Bruins tonight! Take down the Seminoles.
I predict a defensive struggle with UCLA winning a 14-10, 16-13 type game. Defenses are better than the offenses for both teams so I don't see a shootout!

78 ...recent history... Ahh, one of my favorite oxymorons!

157
I thought everybody knew that Harvey Kuenn was the last out in two Koufax no-hitters.

It's basic knowledge.

Just like knowing who Benedict Arnold was.

Oh good. I never get enough Bill Walton.

Oops. Wrong thread.

80%. Would'a done better if I was more Brittany literate, or if I'd peeked over Bob T's shoulder.

156 If only Jeopardy would drop the opera questions (well, maybe the Shakespeare ones too), I'd be happy.

If anyone has a link out there, I'm looking for Charlie Steiner's call of 4+1. Anybody?

164
Thus marking the first ever request for Charlie Steiner's "call" of anything

That's a little bit like asking for the Michael Bolton version of "Yesterday." But, to each his own.

This MENSAn got 64% on the quiz .... guess that means I spent too much time NOT watching the biased news on TV.

159 "Recent history" is not an oxymoron. "History" does not imply "a long time ago." Merely "in the past."

And since "the recent past" is OK, so is "recent history."

165 Charlie Steiner turns me on.

Little bit late (I just got back from seeing ROCKY BALBOA, awesome movie even if it is a two-hour long ad for Philadelphia), but Kobe went to my high school and it does not surprise me at all that he did not know who Benedict Arnold was. As with most other things, there were a couple of really good history teachers at our HS and a lot of not so good ones.

165 Has anyone noticed that they use Steiner's call every time they re-play the 4 + 1 on ESPN. I just don't get it. Why on earth?

I am guessing because he worked there.

172 I've thought of that. I think it might just be because he freaked out. ESPN seems to love screaming calls.

171 It depends on which wire service is being used. The Dodgers are televised by Fox so either ESPN or Fox might object. Radio audio used over highlights happens all the time. I doubt it has anything to do with Steiner having worked at ESPN.

FWIW, I've been a defender of Steiner for awhile but not after last year. He started off weak and got worse as the year went on. There are basic things he can do to improve, things he started doing his first year here. He's hampered by the partner in the booth and by the constant in-game commercials he reads on the air but even with all of that, his in-game calling has been very weak.

I'd add, as I always do when talking about Steiner, that you'd be hard-pressed to find a nicer guy in the business.

164 I have the audio on tape from the bottom of the 9th and 10th. I am sure lots of other folks do as well. I don't know that it is available on the internet.

Steiner has a daily show on XM radio late morning PDT. The phone number for XM is 866-MLB-ON-XM. Call the show after the first of the year (right now they are doing re-runs) and perhaps Steiner could send a copy your way.

Stan from Tacoma

174 Those Panda Express commercials were the worst. Rick Monday used them in the times when he would have been giving the score.

175 re: Steiner being a nice guy. Evidenced by his patience for Lyons. He actually regularly laughed at his jokes.

140. That site is crazy. How can someone get every questions of every show and post it on a web site in game-like format. Ignoring the monumental time and effort, it must violate some licensing agreement Jeopardy has with whichever toy/video game company that produce and distribute the game version of the show. I could learn a lot going through those questions. Of course by the time I got to the end I would have forgotten what I learned in the beginning and middle. (Much like the Washington Post quiz I just took and scored a 70% on).

168 You are correct; however, people are fond of using "jumbo shrimp" as an example of an oxymoron, which it may be, depending on the definition of shrimp that is used. The status of "recent history" as an oxymoron may also depend on the definition of history that is used. Perhaps better examples might include "imaginative Bruin-offense", "Coletti's analysis", or "Pierre's slugging-percentage".

*51. Jon Weisman
50 - I'm not sure, since I can't tell if you're getting my reference to the Kenny Rogers classic.*

I try to ignore everything Kenny Rodgers but admit after seeing Andrew Lloyd Webber on the Kennedy Center Honors show there could be worse things than a bad face lift.

So I prefer to think that if two groups eat worms there isn't much more that can differenciate them.

Sooo... Barry Zito's going to the Giants.

For, like, a lot of money = 7 years, 126 mil.

http://tinyurl.com/yj84w4

Hah. Hah hah hah.

Barry Zito can afford to set up "The Gates" 6 times now!

Should be interesting to see how Zito does without Oakland's defense behind him. At least Pac Bell will keep his home run total down.

181 Everytime, I get depressed about GM, I just thank god we don't have Sabean, he is infinitely worse. He used to intentionally waste draft picks by signing guys before the arbitration deadline. How dumb is that?

A lot of money to spend on a #2 type of guy - hasn't had a reeaaally good year since his Cy Young season.

The more I think about this Zito deal, the more it seems custom made to help the Dodgers. First, we got a better pitcher for less per year and less years. Then our hated enemies, who we signed said better pitcher, from sink all of their available funds for 7 years into a slightly above average pitcher. Which is a horrible use of resources for a team short on them, and horribly shallow in talent on the major league and minor league teams.

Then Zito doesn't go to the Mets who are starving for pitching, and who figure to be the favorites in the NL again next year. Can anyone think of a better scenario for a Zito signing to make all Dodger giddy?

186 - What I don't understand is why the Giants didn't resign Schmidt instead. Why pay far more for longer, instead of keeping what you already have. Insane.

In fairness though, Zito has been a number one starter his entire career with the exception of 04. The hardballtimes.com recently had an excellent article about what constitutes a number 1-5 starter:
http://tinyurl.com/yeb3ng

The Dodgers had two number ones, one number two, one number three and one number five (by the author's definition anyway).

186 I think a mega long term contract is more helpful to the Giants than any other team. Zito won't be blocking anyone useful and he might be around when the Giants become competitive again.

Any player the Giants retain for less than four or five years is ultimately going to be a stop gap. Zito might actually contribute to a successful Giants squad, you can't say the same about any other player the Giants signed. No team should have signed Zito to this kind of money, but if one team had to do it, it should be the Giants.

Zito is not a slightly above avg pitcher, he is a very very good pitcher. No question this makes the Giants a contender- when they were no where near one an hr ago. The question is how will this work out in a few years- its such a long term deal.

189 No, he's a slightly above average pitcher that is declining rapidly. His terrible perhiperals effect him less since he has a consistently low BABIP, but he had the second most walks in the AL without any kind of strikeout totals to back it up.

Zito does make the Giants better, but he's not the type of guy that you want to anchor your team, nor does he make the Giants any kind of threat. That team will be a joke for a long, long time.

We could trade Anderson, Repko, Tomko, Hendrickson, Martinez and a couple of infielders from the low minors for Zito and they'd have a better team than they do now. Question is, why would we want to do something like that?

187 - I'm very bitter about that article, because I had been planning something like that for weeks and didn't get the job done. It's exactly a point I've been trying to get across for a while - people tend to overestimate what it means to be a No. 1/2/3/4 starter.

189 - I wouldn't say they're a contender, considering he's going to roughly replace the production of Schmidt, but as a lefty.

I'm still wondering if they're gonna move Lance Niekro into the rotation, though.

193 - I'm still wondering if they're gonna move Lance Niekro into the rotation, though.

Did he learn the family knuckler over the holidays?

190 - To be fair, his ERA (which is still the best outcome stat for pitchers) has been great every year besides 2004 and his bad peripherals might be offset by a curve that functions similar to a knuckleball. I don't know if he is very, very good, but he is well above average in the vastly superior AL. I don't know if he will go to 2003 form, but he probably will keep his ERA in the 3's for the gnats.

192 - It is a good article and a good point. There are about 10-15 pitchers that people call number ones, while in reality there are, by definition, 30 number ones a year. Meanwhile, hundreds of pitchers are described as 2-4, usually interchangeably. Go ahead and write the article Jon, most of us need it beaten into our heads that pitchers like Lowe are number ones, not solid number twos.

196 I second that, Jon. Let's see that stuff.

$18 million a season for Barry Zito. Wow.

Long time, first time...

187--That article presents an interesting premise, but isn't it vastly, vastly oversimplifying the numbers? For starters wouldn't DIPS ERA be better than ERA? In the interests of time, it's easy (to use the Twins ex.) to take Liriano's 16 game ERA, add Santana's [i]full season[/i] ERA, add them together and divide by 2 and make that your composite Twins #1 starter. Don't you almost have to isolate individual performances to generate an honest evaluation?

Maybe a more interesting comparison would be to take every team's "actual" (the one who ended up performing the best according to whatever peripherals we'd choose to use to evaluate effectiveness) #1
#1, rate their performance for the season and generate a true "average" #1 season then compare it to individual performance to see how players rate out?

198 - The author acknowledges several times that he's taking a simplistic approach at the analysis. This is why we want Jon to take a swing at it :)

Is Barry Zito going to make the Giants any better than they were last year? These are there respective WARP1's for the past three years:

B. Zito: 4.6, 6.3, 7.0
Schmidt: 8.2, 3.0, 6.0

In 2006, Zito was one win above replacement-level better than Schmidt. Zito's younger, and moving into the easier league (certainly for pitchers), so I guess that replacing Schmidt with Zito should improve them over last year by maybe a couple games. There offense is still atrocious, though. It'll be interesting to see how Zito and his flyball tendencies fare moving from the 3-CF OF in OAK to SF. Only Winn is a better than average OF in SF, Roberts in CF and Bonds in LF will probably be below average. I still don't think the Giants are contenders.

From the Dodgers standpoint (which is all I really care about), as long as the Giants don't become serious contenders, this is the best possible destination for Zito. Its worth argueing whether the Dodgers should trade Penny or not, but with Zito in SF, the teams loosing out on Barry could very well be desperate. If SF was one of those teams, it wouldn't matter as I don't think Colletti would trade Penny within the division. But, now, with Texas and the Mets, and perhaps the Mariners, all looking for a veteran starter demand for Penny could be very high.

I think the Dodgers would be just fine keeping Penny and thats what makes Colletti's position so good. The real question is ... what can/do the Dodgers need?

"Zito, 28, spurned lesser offers from the Rangers and Mets to remain in the Bay Area, where he spent his first six seasons with the A's."

Would'nt the offers from elsewhere have to be worth more in order for it to count as a spurning?

The most important effect for Dodger fans, of course, is that, 1 game out of every five, they get double the mileage out of the "Barrrrrrrry Barrrrrrrrrry" chant.

All those splits and stat derivations are a circle-jerk. A guy who you can count on for 200+ innings, 15+ wins, and 3 something ERA in the AL is a very good pitcher. Thus the $126,000,000 contract.
Im sure there were other teams easily willing to throw $18M/year at Zito, the 7 years is probably what landed him. Too long though, I wouldn't want it.

202 - But now I have to learn to dislike Zito, one of my favorite players. We went to UCSB at the same time, and had some friends in common (never met him though). He's obviously a pretty out there guy, but always seemed like a real genuine person.

His first strong performance against LA in the black-and-orange should do the trick.

203 Zito's ERA for the last three years is 4.04, sure he'll give you 200+ innings, but as everyone knows the 15 wins is largely a reflection of the quality of the rest of team, as a pitcher, especially one who neverly hits has no impact on the amount of runs his team scores for him.

Basically the Giants just $126 Million for a pitcher who is a tiny bit better than Brad Penny who sports a 4.06 ERA.

Watch out Rockies, you've got another challenger for 4th place! Heck, I'm sure the D-Backs might even be a little worried now.

205 By the way that 4.06 is Penny's career ERA.

201
According to the OED, spurning implies antipathy more than anything else:

spurn v.
6. To reject with contempt or disdain; to treat contemptuously; to scorn or despise.

There are really early references, but ones that are readable are:
1848 DICKENS Dombey liii, I came back, weary and lame, to spurn your gift. 1868 FREEMAN Norm. Conq. (1877) II. 144 Every offer tending to conciliation had been spurned.

It's original meaning meant "to kick."
It started around the 11th century in print.
An example would be:
1734 ARBUTHNOT, etc. Mart. Scriblerus viii. (1756) 39 The maid..ran up stairs, but spurning at the dead body, fell upon it in a swoon.

196 and others. "By definition" in whose lexicon? On a demonstrably (solid ML stats over three years) pitching-rich squad, fourth starter may be relatively more deserving of accolades than the opening day (number one "by definition") starter for a pitching-poor one. Any discussion of the informal and elusively defined "number ones" requires, as in most of these disagreements about baseball art, a careful definition of terms.
Watching the game for over fifty years now, my definition is decidedly narrow; there are only a handful of genuine ones (my lexicon) in most seasons.
Amazing that with an historically good offense, and a decent defense, playing in a
division not known for its strength in recent years, the Dodgers, with TWO number ones, and a number two to boot, barely managed the playoffs, and were essentially a no-show when they got there.
The Dodgers, says old coot, had no "ones" this season, and have not had one for a while, their post-season futility since '88 a good foundation for the assertion.
Best year of your life, everyone! Back to extremely plastic exile:)

205- thats data-mining to get a number in the 4s. Why the last 3 years? Last 2 is 3.84 ERA, last 4 or 5 yeas is right in the mid 3s. Career is 3.55 ERA. After watching the second half of last year- im prettymuch done with Penny. Talent yes, no head.

203. The innings are impressive if and only if he's good (think Juan Pierre - the more he plays, the worse for the team). Zito is good, so sure, the durability is important.Was it? I don

The 15 wins are meaningless. They're an artifact. Lots of wins is not an EXTRA point in his favor, nor would few wins be a point against him, considering we can actually measure his individual performance and not rely on such a meaningless stat.

The ERA (it's actually 4.05 over the last 3 years) is, again, impressive. BUT: If this is partly a product of a terrific outfield defense in a radical pitcher's park (all that foul territory makes for a lot of foulouts for batters who will now get new life), then moving out of that environment is likely to hurt his ERA. And this is why splits matter. If he was much better at home than on the road, then we can get an idea of how much he needed that cavernous stadium to keep his ERA low.

And here's a surprise: Zito has been better on the road than at home. 4.32 ERA at home, 3.77 ERA away. Weird.

So, his performance says he's better than average, but not great. His age and durability say that he's worth more than his performance alone would imply. So he should get a big contract. But even in this market, $18M/yr seems excessive. In any market, 7 yrs seems excessive for any pitcher.

209 I think that Jon was referring to the Dodgers as currently constituted with Jason Schmidt being one of the Nos. 1s along with Lowe. So he isn't referring to last year, but the current make up of the team, I believe.

200 - I think we should keep Brad Penny unless we are getting a big bat for the outfield. Unfortunately, that bat would probably replace Ethier, not either one of the others.

205 - He was only above 4 once in those three years and he is moving from the AL to the NL so he should see some improvement on that. It is absurd to call Barry Zito a 4.04 ERA pitcher when he has only been that bad once and always been ~.2 runs better or far more.

211 redux: or what 205 said, and more efficiently at that.

212 - Was I referring to anyone? Or are you talking about 187?

I picked the last 3 years, because there has been a clear decline from the start of his career in the last three years for whatever reason. Look at the ERAs and WHIPs for his career and try to tell me there hasn't been a change:

Year ERA WHIP
2000: 2.72 1.176
2001: 3.49 1.232
2002: 2.75 1.134
2003: 3.30 1.183
2004: 4.48 1.394
2005: 3.86 1.200
2006: 3.83 1.403

So basically before 04, Zito had been a pretty amazing pitcher, but lost something where before he had only once been over 1.200 for a WHIP, he now has 2 of 3 seasons over 1.35, that's a big difference in the amount of baserunners he's allowing. Plus the ERAs which had always been below 3.5 are now all over 3.8, again a substantial difference.

209 - I think the problem with the 2006 Dodgers is that they never had the best offense or the best pitching at the same time. Great hitting pre-All Star (Nomar, Kemp, Ethier and All-Star starter Brad Penny), great pitching in the second half (Kuo, Maddux, Lowe, Billz, but mediocre play from Nomar and Ethier is benched). That said, their early exit in the playoffs doesn't invalidate that they were very good in 2006 and played like idiots in the post season.

(I wanted to post runs scored and against pre and post All-Star break but I couldn't figure out where to find the info).

Sorry Jon thought you were the one who posted 187. My mistake.

208

I think it would be appropriate to tag the following to the end of 208:

Did you want to talk about "spurning" or were you just making chitchat?

There's something wrong with having two people named "Barry" in the same starting line-up.

218 - I didn't make that up, I just noted what it said in the Hardballtimes article. That article combined pitchers too, so I could see Lowe as our number one, Maddux and Kuo as the other number one, Penny as the number two, Billz, Tomko and Sele as the number three and Hendrickson and the rest as the number 5. The point is that the Dodgers got above average production out of 4/5 of the rotation last year.

It's better to have multiple Jasons.

From a quick check of Baseball-reference, it doesn't look like there has ever been a team that has had two players with the first name of Barry on it at the same time.

In 1912 thought, Hardin and Jack Barry both played for the Phiadelphia A's.

But they weren't related.

224 Just because Bob is always so good about spelling and typos:

What about 2006 or 2007 thought would they both have still played for the Philadelphia A's?

Phiadelphia sounds better.

Barry Foote and Barry Evans were both on the 1982 Yankees, but never appeared in a game at the same time.

226

Did you want to talk about "Barrys" or were you just making chitchat?

See 220

I keed, I keed ;-)

Barry Lyons and Craig Barry Shipley played together for 2 games on the 1989 Mets.

217 but mediocre play from Nomar

Since we're nitpicking, I think it's fair to say that Nomar's post-ASB performance was not mediocre. It was downright awful. As surprisingly bad as his first half was surprisingly terrific.

217 You can get that from ESPN. I forget the exact numbers, but the Dodgers scored around 5.3 runs per game pre All Star and 4.7 or so after the break.

208,219-

I was just saying that it sounds more heroic to spurn a better offer then a lesser. I just feel that Rosenthal should have just used ignored lesser offers or heck maybe even scoffed at lesser offers. If your going to go the spurning route you might as well jump right into scoffing.

232 - Figures, ESPN is blocked at work. I am not a huge fan of the worldwide leader, but they do have a pretty solid stats package.

I know I am a minority on this, but I think WINS are important when judging an "ACE". Thats why he is an ACE. He is a stopper. A guy who can beat the other teams best pitcher. A guy to stop the bleeding when our offense is struggling. A guy that just needs one more run than the other team and gets it done. I want my aces to win each game they pitch, the other numbers are nice (IP, WHIP , BA against and other things) and important but it's about winning too.

In Zitos case it's even more important to me cause were talking about a guy who over the last 4 years has pitched on teams that won 90+ games in all but one year and that was the high 80's.

In that time frame Zito is 55-46. Thats not an ACE to me. Schmidt is 58-28 during the same time. Thats' more like it.

Is Zito's signing at 7/126 just a sign of things to come? Or is it just a reflection this years market?

235. But he can't do without run support. And if he's winning those games 1-0, that'll show up in his ERA - no value in double-counting by considering wins to be an extra indicator. Similarly, if he's losing 1-0, the Ls aren't his fault. A guy who goes 0-20 with a 1.5 ERA is a fantastic pitcher who is very unlucky. A guy who goes 20-0 with a 5.5 ERA is lousy but really lucky.

Obviously, Zito is good. But the wins are neither here nor there.

I want my aces to win each game they pitch, the other numbers are nice (IP, WHIP , BA against and other things) and important but it's about winning too.

But the "other numbers" are the only things that a pitcher has control over (well, BAA includes luck too but we could add Ks, BBs, etc.). Whether a pitcher's performance is turned into a win or not is up to the offense.

237- A good example to your point would be Roger Clemens in 2005.

231 - True, he was fantastically bad, with two memorable exceptions. I would say that his second half was far more surprising than his first half, though. He was hitting over his head at first, but everyone knew he could rake (not .350+ average), but he hit what .230, with an OBP under .300 and a OPS under .700 in the second half. If he going to have ISOpower of ~.2 and ISOpatience of ~.06-.07 he is going to need to hit about .285-.295 to get his OPS into the acceptable .840-860 range for a first baseman. Basically Nomar has decent power and patience skills but not enough to make up for even an average batting average (.275 is average I think).

Ofcourse wins are important-
You have to go deep into a game to get one most of the time.
Wins take in to account clutch pitching (in jams), holding runners, getting double plays- basically "smart pitching" etc....
Wins are not random.

In the big picture Zito looks to be about a Schmidt level pitcher with a little less stuff but a little more durability.

That said Ill take Schmidt for 3 years over Zito for 7- much less risk.

But Giants fans should like the deal for sure.

Plus, it was going to be a boring season if the Giants were as bad as they looked yesterday... ;)

Im curious if the Giants will have to give Bonds more $ to keep him from brooding now that hes not the highest paid Gaint, or even Barry.

I want my aces to win each game they pitch, the other numbers are nice (IP, WHIP , BA against and other things) and important but it's about winning too.

But the "other numbers" are the only things that a pitcher has control over (well, BAA includes luck too but we could add Ks, BBs, etc.). Whether a pitcher's performance is turned into a win or not is up to the offense.

Its a good thing the Dodgers have the good young pitching they do otherwise I could see the payroll skyrocketing in the next couple years due to the inflated cost FA pitching.

Oops. Not sure why the double-post happened. It's not THAT important a point...

But since I'm here, 241 misses the point. Wins are important for teams, and a good indication of team quality. They are assigned via arbitrary and somewhat bizarre rules to individual pitchers as an accounting device, but they are valueless as an indicator of performance, especially since we have much better direct measures of that performance.

That's the basic problem with many of the "traditional" stats (W/L, RBI, runs) - that they attempt to assign team accomplishments to individual players. With runs and RBIs, yes, one player scored and another provided the play hit/out/walk that drove him in, but unless the even was a HR (same guy gets the run and the RBI) then it's an arbitrary step to assign values to individuals. And we already measure the components (HRs, BBs, hits, etc.) so to also measure the outcomes and then assign credit is redundant and often misleading.

I'd like to find the guy who first decided that pitchers should get wins and losses (same for goalies in hockey), dig him up, and punch him in the nose.

244

start game.
pitch 5 inn.
leave game with lead.

If you distill all the hokum stat splits and mumbo jumbo circumstances and look at a long term track record- good pitchers win games and have low ERAs.
That's not exactly Newton's laws of relativity.

244- Back in my day the only way a pitcher could get a win was by pitching the full 9 innings and giving up less runs than the other guy!

I thought Newton's laws only pertained to figs and pastries?

I am in the lack of defense is going to hurt Zito group. Imagine all the fly balls that Bonds will miss. In addition, Zito is going from the loosest clubhouse to the hectic Bonds clubhouse. I hope you are prepared to lose Zito. On the bright side, I am sure Alyssa Milano has a new reason to want to go out with you again.

Isn't she dating Brad Penny now?

Or was that Tomy Romo.

245 - If you want to simplify things, just say that good pitchers have low ERAs. Wins add nothing to the discussion.

Would you argue that a pitcher with more wins but a higher ERA is more valuable than a teammate with fewer wins and a lower ERA, all else being equal?

Watching Zito attempt to hit is going to be hilarious.

250

ERA and INN maybe?

I don't know that stat, but doesn't it seem like the 6th and 7th inning is when many games are decided and the starter who can keep it together one inning longer than the other guy is the winner?

ESPN Poll:

49,000 votes in.

86.5% say Gnats overpaid for Zito.
56.2% say Gnats will miss playoffs with Zito in rotation
55% say A's will miss playoffs w/o Zito

The Giants took a beating in the media and by fans for re-signing Bonds and giving him so much money when he seemingly had nowhere to go. Also, a lot of fans were upset with the team going after older players once again. I think all of that criticism pushed them towards trying to get Zito done. I heard before that they just wanted to look competitive with other teams for him.

252 Even then, it's greatly dependent on the bullpen. Zito will win less games this year because the Giants will be trotting out Jellybean Benitez instead of the A's sick bullpen.

In other sporting world news, an Indian chess player has been banned for 10 years for using a bluetooth device to cheat in tournaments. Motorola had no comment.

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/news/story?id=2710555

Way to use chess performance enhancers.

Well cross Zito off my list of fantasy players to draft. I have held a ban for both of my fantasy teams from drafting or bidding for any Giant players. I know that might have hurt my chances to win some years but this Dodger fan has his principles. The only time I had a Giant on my team was last year when Hillenbrand got traded after my league's trade deadline, so I was stuck with him. Paying a pitcher for 5 years or more is definitely a huge gamble no matter what team, so I hope this blows up in the Giants face. Nothing would please me more.

good pitchers win games and have low ERAs. That's not exactly Newton's laws of relativity.

Good pitchers also lose games they deserved to win, and bad pitchers win games they deserved to lose. And irrelevant pitchers win and lose games they didn't really affect. Wins and losses are a dumb stat for individual pitchers.

And your point kinda is "Newton's laws of relativity." In that Newton had no such laws. You either meant Einstein's General Theory of Relativity or Newton's "laws of motion." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_laws

259

I move that it is all relative.

259 - I didn't know if that was a joke or what? It would be hard to understand Newton's laws of relativity, since they don't exist.

261-

The Fig is relative to the Newton.

258
That will not hurt you too much. There are only a few pitchers I would draft from the Giants for fantasy.

FWIW, here's a view out of Detroit:

*Lynn Henning's Top 5
Dodgers tops among most improved
Lynn Henning / The Detroit News*

These teams appear poised to make the biggest improvements in 2007 (records from 2006 in parentheses):

1. Dodgers (88-74): Expect the Dodgers to run away with the National League West after adding Jason Schmidt, Juan Pierre and Luis Gonzalez, among others. And don't sell them short as the NL's World Series team.

http://tinyurl.com/y5qxaq

194 Wikipedia reports that Lance already knows the family knuckler. He's the son of the late Joe Niekro.

The funniest bit of trivia there is that Joe Niekro hit his only career homer off of his brother Phil.

I don't think this is a bad signing by the Giants. Giving a pitcher a 7 year deal is almost always a bad deal, but what did the Giants have to lose? Zito is a good bet to stay healthy all 7 years. He also brings the Giants another "big name player". Zito is a not an ace but he should be a solid addition to the Giants' rotation. They overpaid by a few million a year, but at least they did it for a pretty good player. It's far better than spending the same amount on Hillenbrand and Suppan.

To the Giants credit, if I had to sign on the market to a seven year contract, it would be Zito.

More from the "ou-of-left-field news":

December 27, 2006
Is an Almost-as-Big Unit Better Than No Unit At All?

Could Randy Johnson don a Mariners uniform in 2007? Those speculating aren't entirely convinced floundering GM Bill Bavasi could pull off a (worthwhile) deal to acquire the Yankees' aging Unit, and although we're not the most astute of M's followers, we're dubious, too. We think it's more likely the Mariners will trade for another mound giant—the Dodgers' Mark Hendrickson. Because we saw him downtown last night...

What do you think, Mariners fans? Would Bavasi dare trade Sexson or Beltre for Hendrickson's career 4.98 ERA and .291 BAA? Bavasi has high hopes, this pitcher is nearly as big tall as Johnson—and would be a whole lot cheaper. Could it happen?

Be still my beating heart!

http://tinyurl.com/y743un

268 -
Dioner Navarro, you will not have died in vain!
I'm not dead.
Er, Dioner Navarro, you will not have been traded to the Devil Rays in vain.
They're getting better.

I'd trade Hendrickson to get back Beltre in a heartbeat. Where do I sign? WHERE!?!

Only if its Hendrickson and LaRoche for Beltre and King Felix.

As to pitchers and ERA and wins... while I would agree that wins are WAY over-rated, I still do believe that some pitchers "know how to win" and will do so 10-9 or 2-1.
By the same token, some clearly know how to lose.
Shouldn't a pitcher throw strikes to Bonds with a 10-0 lead but not with a 1-0 lead? Doesn't that lead to him being the days winning pitcher but with a higher ERA?

Funny.
www.theonion.com/content/node/50814

271 - We'd be paying all the money in that deal too, since Beltre's got 3yr/$36m left on that contract. That puts the Dodgers into Red Sox territory and leaves questions about what to do with Betemit, but looks like a fine idea.

King Felix would assure that we'd trade Brad Penny, or else we'd have to push Billingsley out of the LA rotation (although having Bills not pitch 180 innings would probably be good in the long run).

273. That was funny. That they were able to do without taking the justified-but-all-too-easy road (slamming Jim Tracy) was especially impressive.

275 - Tracy's only been there a year, and he can't be blamed for everything. It's not his fault they signed Burnitz.

271 - A more likely scenario would be Hendrickson and Betemit for Beltre and a AA or AAA pitching prospect. You will not get King Felix unless you give up a Jason Schmidt or Derek Lowe. Or send Hendrickson and Betemit to the Rangers and get Hank Blalock. JMO!!

274 - The money is a wash if you trade Penny.

It's moot though. I don't think Seattle swaps Felix Hernandez for anyone in the league right now. Though, with Bavasi in charge, you never know...

277 - Depends on the money situation; Seattle might like to clear the payroll to make a run at Zambrano.

Keep it simple - Hendrickson for Mark Lowe, touchy elbow and all.

280 - any relation to Mr Pooka Shell?

274. It's not obvious to me that, sentiment aside, the Dodgers would prefer Beltre to Betemit.

276. Oh, I know. Pittsburgh has been a basket case since they let Bonds go. But if you'd written that article, could you have refrained from at least one gratuitous Jim Tracy shot? If so, you're a bigger man than I.

Did Russ Ortiz suddenly forget how to win?

284. Careful, man! You can't just whip out the R.O. reference without warning. Bob T. might have been drinking coffee or something. That's dangerous...

279 - I don't think King Felix is costing them that much or will for another couple years till he gets near the one year before FA year. Believe me, if we could land King Felix, I would be ecstatic. I do think Penny's trade stock does go up right now and the Dodgers if they don't react too hastily might get some pretty tasty offers for Penny. If not, we hold off trading him till midseason when we see what we truly need before the deadline.

283 - at the end of the year, maybe. You can always blame him for not giving Craig Wilson any playing time, but that article was written in July

286. Good plan on Penny. Sadly, however, we already know what we need, and Colletti disagrees. We need OFers who can hit and throw. And we need to play Loney frequently.

Midseason the Dodgers could trade anyone, really.

I'm wondering if the Blue Jays would be interested in Glaus for Betemit and Penny in light of the fact that they have like one left-handed hitter, and they just got Frank Thomas.

289 - Now that would be an interesting trade. Bring back Glaus to SoCal to man 3B and give us the sock we need. His BA is not high but he will take a walk if not getting his pitches. Sandwich him between Nomar and Kent and he will get some pitches.
Then I guess we can groom LaRoche to take over Kent's position at 2B in 2008. He can be another Ryne Sandberg type 2B. Food for thought!!

If we knew getting another bat would send Gonzalez or Pierre to the bench, sure I'd consider trading Penny, but whatever bat we get will likely end up replacing Ethier. Sad as it is, Ethier is the third best hitter on the team. I'd rather not trade our number two starter for an incremental upgrade.

I don't want Glaus. He's paid a lot of money, injury prone, replaces one of our only plus defenders, blocks our top prospect, and is entering his decline phase.

Is Ken Howell the Dodger player in this photo?

http://tinyurl.com/yzxagn

Just say no to Beltre. LaRoche will be a better player than Beltre.

292 - Could it be Eddie Murray

294 - No, the date's wrong.

Now I'm thinking maybe Ralph Bryant

Gotta be a pitcher though (the jacket, plus the awkward slide result), right?

Ken Howell went 0 for 4 vs. SF in '86.

Ralph Bryant had a single and a walk (and two HR) vs. SF in '86.

Dennis Powell had a double.

Dennis Powell pic:
http://tinyurl.com/y8q7ga

Box score of his double vs. SF, 8/15/86. It was on the road, at night.

http://retrosheet.org/boxesetc/B08150SFN1986.htm

DODGERS 6TH: Williams grounded out (third to first); Powell
doubled to left; Sax singled to shortstop [Powell to third]; Sax
was caught stealing second (catcher to shortstop); Russell
walked; Stubbs struck out; 0 R, 2 H, 0 E, 2 LOB. Dodgers 0,
Giants 0.

I think that's it. That was fun! Plus, I posted for the cycle :)

A pitcher going from second to third on a grounder to short! It's a bold idea.

If it works.

303 - Note the ensuing stolen-base attempt(and caught stealing) with one out and runners at the corners. Followed by a walk.

303 I would say it is a bold idea even if doesn't work.

Defintion of Bold: not hesitating or fearful in the face of actual or possible danger or rebuff

305 - Ssjames spurns Bob's use of "bold."

I cannot picture Zito in Giant pants, they are so much baggier than his pants in Oakland. I guess they can always wake tighter ones for him.

A bold idea indeed!

Rene Magritte tells typography jokes.

This is not bold.

307 - for some reason that post immediately made me think of Manny Ramirez.

309 - But the pipe really wasn't a pipe. It was a picture of a pipe. Whereas what you wrote really is bold.

Jasper Johns' images of numbers are celebrated, I'm told, because what he's representing is what he represented. I see what you did along those lines.

That's today's episode of "Lessons from LACMA."

And now, FSCD...

Bob, I have great respect for your knowledge of Canadian cuisine. So, how would you rate poutine?

312
I have never eaten poutine and I think I'm going to keep it that way.

I've eaten poutine and was underwhelmed. Sort of like what I imagine eating phlegm would be like. You can get it at the Canadian Cafe in Monrovia if you've a mind to. I realize that is not close to Carson City where Jim is.

I believe the Canadian Cafe in Monrovia is Southern California's leading purveyor of Canadian cuisine.

It's not a long list.

Personally, I prefer Sammy's Saskatoon Sausage Hut in Saugus.

Der Wienersnitzel is considered haute cuisine here.

Poutine on fries seems to be the big deal there. They make a pretty decent burger. If they came out with chicken-fried Canadian bacon, I think the place would take off.

But Jim, you can go to the Orr House.

It is to the infinite credit of whoever came up with the mark hendrickson rumor that they constructed a scenario for which reacquiring Adrian beltre would be anything more than a mockery of common sense.

Sort of like what I imagine eating phlegm would be like.

I'm thinking that this does not end up framed on the restaurant wall.

{320] and before: ACK!

New post up top - sort of.

319

That would be me. And I'm with you, Steve. It's a no-brainer.

323 -- I would trade Mark Hendrickson for anything in the world. Any contract, any player -- even Juan Pierre. I would trade him for any six Knicks contracts Isiah Thomas would send us. Anything.

324

I would trade Hendrickson for an order of poutine. Regular, Italian or Greek. Or mixed together.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poutine

325 -- That crap looks horrible, but I'd rather have it pitching than Mark Hendrickson.

Thanks for the post Jon. I have been visiting family in socal for the past 5 days with no internet access. Just got back, went to DT and learned of this wonderful news.

As an 8 year-old I attended this game with my grandfather. We had great seats in the loge just over 1B. He also took me to Sandy's 1963 no-hitter against the Giants. We sat in the left field pavilion.

Seems incredible that there is no audio or video of these no-hitters aside from the 9th inning audio of the 1965 perfect game.