New Steroids Report Reminds Us Of Baseball’s Institutional Failure

As a Yankees fan, my reaction to today’s news can be nothing but euphoric. I have nothing against David Ortiz and Manny Ramirez personally (I rather like the latter), but it’s very, very satisfying to put to rest the notion that the Yankees cheat while the underdog Red Sox scratch and claw and hustle their way to victory.

But when the dust settles, my take on the situation remains the same. It remains shameful that the supposedly anonymous 2003 testing samples had names attached to them, and inexplicable that these samples weren’t destroyed after they had served their purpose. The still-unrevealed players were promised anonymity and don’t deserve to have their names released, but then again, how is that fair to Alex Rodriguez, Ortiz, and Ramirez? At this point, it’s clear that baseball – the league office, team management, union representation, writers, and every other group that comprises the institution – has handled this situation in the worst way possible. For me, the most damaging effect of this saga isn’t the realization that many of the game’s most prominent players cheated their way to fame and into our hearts. I simply can’t get worked up about that. No, it’s the realization that those that were entrusted with protecting and nurturing the game I love categorically failed to carry out their ultimate responsibility. That’s what makes me lose faith in the game, not the cheating.

At least we’re mere days away from “2004*, 2007*” shirts being available for purchase outside Yankee Stadium.

Tiger Woods Has Offended Rick Reilly’s Genteel Sensibilities

ESPN’s Rick Reilly is mad at Tiger Woods. He is mad at Tiger Woods because Woods – like many hyper-competitive and wildly successful athletes – gets quite intense and curses, throws clubs, and displays generally ornery behavior during his events.

More baffling than his selection of Woods is Reilly’s devotion of a paragraph to the admission of Woods’ ultimate harmlessness:

Look, in every other case, I think Tiger Woods has been an A-plus role model. Never shows up in the back of a squad car with a black eye. Never gets busted in a sleazy motel with three “freelance models.” Never gets so much as a parking ticket. But this punk act on the golf course has got to stop. If it were my son, I’d tell him the same thing: “Either behave or get off the course.”

Do you know what has got to stop? Things like Donte’ Stallworth killing a guy while driving drunk. Or like Zach Randolph drunkenly driving some family members around after one of his games. Or Jason Richardson endangering his young child’s life by going 90 in a 35. Or ESPN’s mysterious decision not to cover the rape charges currently facing the Steelers’ Ben Roethlisberger. Those things have to stop, and deserve roughly a thousand times more coverage than they each received.

Of all the professional athletes in the world to complain about, Reilly chooses Tiger Woods. It hurts to think about all of the interesting, revealing, and progressive topics to which those 800 words could have been devoted.

Two Steps Forward, One Step Back For YES Booth

Michael Kay and Al Leiter are two-thirds of YES' most energetic booth

It’s taken me until late July, but I’ve finally realized that the liveliest combination of the Yankees’ broadcasters consists of Michael Kay, Al Leiter, and Paul O’Neill. That doesn’t mean that this group is the best group; even if O’Neill were capable of focusing on one subject, he wouldn’t be able to communicate his thoughts clearly. For better or worse, however, these three provide bountiful banter, occasional insight, and the rare wisecrack.

The trio was at it again in this afternoon’s game against the Oakland Athletics, producing three exchanges that I found particularly interesting. The first came during Hideki Matsui’s first inning at-bat against Dallas Braden. With two outs and runners on first and third, Matsui hit the ball to the opposite field, scoring Derek Jeter. After the moment had passed, Paul O’Neill and Al Leiter (a former pitcher) had this (paraphrased) exchange:

O’Neill: Al, how aggravating is that to see, as a pitcher? You’ve got two outs, you make a good pitch, and he just fights it off into the opposite field. Now a run scored and you’ve got to get after it all over again. Just a tough break for the pitcher.

Leiter: He didn’t make a good pitch though. He hung it over the middle of the plate. [Kurt] Suzuki set up outside, and Braden left it right over the middle. That was a mistake.

Leiter’s contribution was impressive in two ways. First and foremost, he broke the mold by not accepting an easy and banal explanation as a valid piece of analysis. Broadcasters have made a habit out of regurgitating analytical platitudes instead of taking the time to examine something on its own terms. Leiter rejected this notion and, in turn, provided the viewer with a helpful bit of insight. Less importantly, Leiter’s ability to see that before the overhead replay was even shown was awfully cool. Sure enough, the footage confirmed that Braden missed inside by a good six inches, leaving Matsui a very hittable pitch right over the plate.

Later in the game, discussion shifted towards the day’s Hall of Fame induction ceremony. As a natural consequence, the booth began debating the worthiness of several controversial players. Michael Kay eventually whipped himself up into a justified outrage over some voters’ stubborn insistence on not voting for any player during their first attempt at induction, no matter their qualifications. Kay explained to us that some voters do this because they believe no player should ever be elected unanimously, since inclusion is an incredible honor. Eventually, Kay called this practice “stupid,” and said that it reflected poorly on the voters. I was heartened to hear this. I’ve known Kay to be passionately stodgy about a variety of baseball issues, so I awaited his agreement with these voters’ ridiculous exercise. Agreement never came, and for that, I am happy.

Of course, Kay almost instantly lost any fictional Kevin Points he may have won mere seconds earlier. He rightfully wondered how Greg Maddux’s impending candidacy would go, since Maddux is – by any measure, newfangled or old-fashioned – one of the very best pitchers in the history of baseball. He then had this exchange with himself:

Kay: Greg Maddux is one of the best pitchers of all time, and should be inducted unanimously. But Tom Seaver wasn’t unanimous, and Tom Seaver was better than Greg Maddux.

My father and I furrowed our respective brows, because we were both pretty sure that this isn’t true. A quick look at some key statistics validated our suspicions:

• Seaver: 4,782 IP, 311 W, 2.86 ERA, 127 ERA+, 1.12 WHIP, 2.62 K/BB
• Maddux: 5,008 IP, 355 W, 3.16 ERA, 132 ERA+, 1.14 WHIP, 3.37 K/BB

It’s not a landslide, but Maddux was a better pitcher than Seaver. He threw more innings, had a better ERA relative to his peers, and had superior control. Kay’s dismissing of Maddux’s credentials wasn’t a huge slight, but it wasn’t exactly measured either.

That’s it. Here’s to a 2.5 game lead over the Red Sox and a 7.04 ERA from uber-bargain John Smoltz.

Like Shooting Fish In A Barrel

I’m a little worn down from yesterday’s extra long post and a hectic day at work, so I’ve chosen to produce the easiest bit of content I know: a critique of a Joe Morgan chat. Enjoy these nuggets and – if you’re in New York City – stay dry.

Matt (New Jersey): Hey Joe. Other than Pujols, is there any better 1B than Justin Morneau? What a fantastic player he is…

Joe Morgan: You’re 100% correct, with the exception of Pujols. Justin Morneau for the last 3 years continues to improve. That’s the mark of a great player, that you continue to improve. He’s considered an offensive player as much as anything. He doesn’t run as well as Pujols, but he’s a great hitter. Prince Fielder and Justin Morneau are the future stars at that position, though Pujols is still young.

Justin Morneau was born on May 15th, 1981, making him almost exactly seven months younger than Albert Pujols. I will bet you a popsicle that Joe Morgan thinks Morneau is five years younger than he actually is. Also, I’m pretty sure that Fielder and Morneau’s 1.000ish OPSes make them current stars at the first base position.

Michael (Houston): Do you think the Astros can really do it?

Joe Morgan: Yes. I don’t know what’s the in water there in Houston, but it seems to energize these guys in the second half every year. I thought they could have made the playoffs last year, except for the hurricane that moved those three games from Houston to Milwaukee. I think they can make the run this year.

If Joe Morgan thinks the Astros can make the playoffs, then they aren’t going to make the playoffs. After this anti-endorsement, I’m more confident about this than ever. For more detailed explanations about the Astros forthcoming failure, look here and here.

Matt (Jacksonville): Joe, the Cubs can’t seem to get on a consistent roll. Is there anyway for them to get consistency this year?

Joe Morgan: Last year there was something about the Cubs personality of the team. There was something different. They were a fun team to watch. I enjoyed watching them. I enjoyed talking to them. There just seems to be a different personality of the team this year. In addition, the confidence level has fallen a little bit. The injury to Ramirez set them back. Everyone talked about DeRosa and he’s one of my favorite players, but Jason Marquis is also gone. It’s just a little different now. The answer is, I don’t know if they’ll be able to re-gain that consistency of last year, but they still have a shot at their division.

The Cubs’ mediocre record has nothing to do with a change in team personality. It has everything to do with this:

• 2008: .354 OBP, .443 SLG, .797 OPS
• 2009: .323 OBP, .403 SLG, .726 OPS

Their offense has gone from one of the very best in baseball to one of the very worst. But yes, let’s waste an entire paragraph attributing the Cubs’ decline to “a different personality” and not the inability to hit a baseball.

Ben (Lincoln, NE): So Mr. Morgan, are the White Sox legit contenders? Because it seems most analysts still only think the Tigers or Twins have a real shot at the AL Central… and I’m not sure why they ignore the southsiders…

Joe Morgan: I definitely believe the White Sox have a chance. Any time you have Dye, Thome, Ramirez, you have a good team. I don’t know when Carlos Quentin is coming back, but if they can get healthy, I think they definitely have a chance.

Carlos Quentin returned to the White Sox yesterday, as reported by Joe Morgan’s employer. He also played in last night’s game, going 1 for 4 with a single. But that’s okay, I’m sure Morgan’s professional responsibilities don’t include knowing about a 2008 MVP candidate’s recent return from an injury.

Time to grab some dinner, watch Sergio Mitre make his season debut, and wonder why the Yankees refuse to put Phil Hughes into the rotation. Until next time.

Checking In On My Five Strongest Pseudo-Predictions

I get much of my material from wrongheaded or outright stupid predictions. Without assertions like this, this, and this, Fan Interference would be reduced to the ramblings of a man with nothing against which to push back. So, since I’ve spent some time lambasting particularly ridiculous augury, it seems only fair that I take an objective look at my five strongest pseudo-predictions for the 2009 Major League Baseball season. Here they are:

THE YANKEES’ & RED SOX’ OFF-SEASONS

In early March, Jayson Stark argued that the Red Sox’ free agent signings did as much to improve their team as the Yankees’ did theirs. As usual, this story was reduced to the tale of the underdog Red Sox (and their $120 million payroll) valiantly persevering in the face of the monolithic Yankees and their infinite resources. My problem with Stark’s argument was his failure to grasp the idea of marginal improvement. At the start of the off-season, the Red Sox had a much stronger team than the Yankees. Therefore, their free agent signings (a fourth outfielder, a fifth starter, a bullpen arm, and more starting pitching depth) were good but only a slight improvement for an already wonderful team. The Yankees, on the other hand, had a flawed team that required serious work in important areas. So they signed C.C. Sabathia, A.J. Burnett, and Mark Teixeira – three of the top five available free agents. These signings represented a significant improvement because of the team’s initial weakness. Stark failed to understand this, making his argument irksome and faulty.

Let’s take a look at how the Red Sox’ signings have performed in the first half of the season. Rocco Baldelli – signed as insurance for J.D. Drew and to hit left-handed pitching – has put up a .282/.358/.471 line in 85 at-bats. These are wonderful numbers for a fourth outfielder, but no one should be surprised that Baldelli has against had some problems staying healthy. Brad Penny was signed to be the team’s fifth starter, but he’s pitched even worse than that. He has a 5.02ERA and a 1.50 WHIP, with pretty good control but floundering stuff (118 hits in 98 innings). Takashi Saito was brought in to shore up the bullpen with an experienced power arm. He has been merely fine, striking out 28 in 30 innings but walking too many batters. Lastly, John Smoltz was supposed to be a late-season boon to the Red Sox rotation. At this point, we simply don’t know if the signing was a good one or not. Smoltz has thrown 20 innings in four starts, producing a 5.40 ERA. It’s just too early to tell. As you can see, the Red Sox imported a solid group of bit players, but nothing warranting emphatic commendation.

The Yankees signed C.C. Sabathia to replace Chien-Ming Wang, who was masquerading as the team’s ace. Sabathia has had an good but not great first half, posting a 3.66 ERA while struggling somewhat with his control. We must consider him a slight disappointment at this point, even if it is early. A.J. Burnett’s 3.81 ERA is deceptive. He’s walked far too many batters, but his ability to strike out batters has kept this number from getting out of control. He’s done what many expected – wild variance between dominating and worthless starts. Mark Teixeira has been wonderful. The durable first baseman has a .280/.381/.551 line with 23 home runs, even with a woeful first month of the season. He has fulfilled the lofty expectations.

There is simply no competition between these two groups of players. The Red Sox signed a group of useful parts that will play relatively minor roles in the team’s race for the pennant. The Yankees signed an elite group of talent that will make or break their attempt to make the postseason. Baldelli, Penny, Saito and Smoltz have been worth roughly two wins so far this season. Sabathia, Burnett, and Teixeira have been worth nine.

Both then and now, you could easily make an argument for Red Sox superiority over the Yankees. But if the debate is about the quality of talent imported during the winter, there is no contest. Stark’s assertion appears just as wrong now as it did then.

Fan Interference’s 2009 MLB All-Stars: National League

On Wednesday, I posted my picks for this year’s American League All-Star Team. Before disclosing my National League choices, I just want to make one thing clear. As you may have noticed, I’m disregarding Major League Baseball’s rule that every team in baseball has to be represented on the rosters. The game should be about showcasing the best players regardless of their distribution, not patronizingly pandering to each and every market for a few extra dollars. So, to the entire city of Chicago, I apologize. You have no All-Stars.

Here are my picks for the National League team. The blurbs are short are no shorter than last time because I’m tired and have a headache I got carried away. 

Fan Interference’s 2009 MLB All-Stars: American League

Ever since the end of my childhood (this occurred around 2000), I’ve watched Major League Baseball’s All-Star Game with less awe and more conviction. My interest in the game has become more self-righteous as I root for the game’s more overrated players to fail and the under-appreciated stars to succeed; or, in last year’s case, I root for the game to end. Not all inclinations are based on my ongoing quest for the accurate evaluation and perception of players. Yankees receive cheers no matter what, Red Sox remain vilified – that goes for any Met not named Carlos Beltran, too.

I find the All-Star selection process much more interesting than the game itself. Fans, players, and managers contribute to varying degrees in setting the 33-man roster. Each group – much like any group – has its idiots, its intelligent voters, and a group that falls somewhere between the two. Ultimately, the final rosters provide a useful glimpse into which players embody the intersection of popularity and skill. As you might expect, I prefer that the selectors look at the latter almost to the total exclusion of the former. More difficult is the question of which player is more deserving: the one-half wonder, or the (probably) more talented player with a consistent track record? I lean more towards the established player, although certain cases allow for the rewarding of an incredible first half, even if it is unlikely or unsustainable. There’s a fair argument on both sides.

Now that I’ve bored you with my philosophical musings, I’d like to share my picks for the American League’s 33-man roster. The actual roster can be found here, although they do not yet include the winner of the Final Vote. I’m loosely following the prescribed format: eight starting position players, 13 pitchers (distributed arbitrarily between starters and relievers), and 12 bench players (with a backup at each position). The National League will follow in the coming days. Here we go:

Randy Johnson : Bird :: Colonies : Great Britain

In honor of the bee-induced delay in last night’s Astros-Padres game, I give you my favorite instance of local wildlife peskily including itself in a baseball game:

Happy Fourth of July Weekend everyone.

Unfortunate Word Order Department

Keesup here. I went to mlb.com last night to watch my game and was greeted by the following headline that I thought I should share:

I know there have been similar incidents when reporting on Chien-Ming Wang, but this one seemed particularly amusing to me in its ability to dirty up Chamberlain’s unusual first name and, if reading the phrase as a whole, the transformation of the term into a transitive verb. How does one do that to an early lead? Jeter must know how. Also, I apparently took the screen grab right as the well-massaged lead was being relinquished.

Lest You Forget My Antipathy Towards The Red Sox

scha-den-freu-de: noun, 1895; enjoyment obtained from the troubles of others