The following paragraph opened Peter King's All-Pro picks in this week's Sports Illustrated:
"Why is pro football the country's No. 1 sport? It's because the NFL always has new stars at the ready. San Diego's LaDainian Tomlinson starts to slow at 29 and -- boom! -- here come Minnesota's Adrian Peterson and Tennessee's Chris Johnson, both 23, to provide thrills at running back."
The paragraph is slightly revised in its online inarnation:
"The NFL has become the country's irreplaceable sport, and I maintain it's because the league always has a crop of new stars at the ready. LaDainian Tomlinson hits 29 and -- boom -- here come Adrian Peterson and Chris Johnson, both 23, to provide thrills at running back."
What?
You can make a list of reasons why football is the most popular sport in the nation right now; its 16-game schedule and the pageantry of each game probably is at the top of the list.
But its influx of young stars? That's what lifts football over baseball (Hanley Ramirez, B.J. Upton, Evan Longoria), basketball (Derrick Rose, Rajon Rondo, Kevin Durant) and hockey (Sidney Crosby, Alex Ovechkin, Phil Kessel)?
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Hall of Fame ballots to be loaded in coming years
Rickey Henderson is the tip of the iceberg.
Henderson is the only sure-fire newcomer to this year's Baseball Hall of Fame ballot. It's a relatively weak class of newcomers that includes good-but-not-great (or even great-but-not-legendary) players like Jay Bell, David Cone, Jesse Orosco and Mo Vaughn -- and that's why many are convinced that Jim Rice, on the ballot for the 15th and final time, finally get enough support to get in.
A player like Don Mattingly, who made his debut on the ballot in 2001, can't count on the same sort of late support, though. By the time Mattingly gets to his 12th or 15th year on the ballot, it's going to be jam-packed with newcomers more deserving of Cooperstown consideration -- and the years of seeing only one player elected, as was the case as recently as 2006, are going to go by the wayside.
Don't forget, too, that Mark McGwire, who probably won't get elected this year, probably will see a swell of support over the next couple of years as fans and writers alike come to grips with the fact that we'll never know who was using steroids in that era and who wasn't.
Here's a selection of the players who will be eligible for election to Cooperstown for the first time in 2010:
* Roberto Alomar: Finished with 2,700 career hits and a .300 average, but his 12 straight All-Star nods tell you about all you need to know. In.
(Note: All-Star selections are not a good way to pick Hall of Famers. For one thing, they completely discount what players do in August and September. Still, though, if you make 12 in a row, you probably were the dominant player at your position for a long time.)
* Barry Larkin: A great player for a long time, but he might end up hurt by the way that Nomar Garciaparra, Derek Jeter and Alex Rodriguez changed the shortstop position. His career numbers -- 2,340 hits, .295 batting average, 198 home runs -- just aren't real impressive for a shortstop anymore. Out, but he might get in anyway.
* Edgar Martinez: Whew. The first great designated hitter and considered one of the best right-handed hitters of the '90s. Except for 1993 and 1994, when he was injured, he hit .300 every year from 1990 until 2001. He'll be a fascinating, fascinating test case. Ultimately, though, what costs him might not be his position but the fact that his career got started too late for him to amass great numbers. (He had just 2,247 career hits and 309 career home runs.) He's my mom's favorite player of the modern era -- or favorite player who didn't play for the 1967 Boston Red Sox -- but it's hard to find a way to get him in. Out.
* Fred McGriff: Remember when 400 home runs meant something? Out.
And in 2011:
* Carlos Baerga: Everything fizzled after he left the Indians. Trouble is, he was still just 27 at that point. Out.
* Jeff Bagwell: So many power-hitting first basemen and outfielders are about to come down the pike. What's the difference between Bagwell and McGriff? One MVP and 47 career home runs. That's it. Out.
(Note: It's going to be really, really interesting to watch the issue of race as these ballots play out. McGriff and Bagwell have virtually the same credentials, but I'd bet money that Bagwell eventually gets into the Hall of Fame while McGriff forever remains on the outside.)
* John Franco: It's hard to see the Hall lowering its standards for relievers, what with the widespread belief that any half-decent starting pitcher could turn himself into a star middle reliever if that's what he wanted to do. Out.
* Juan Gonzalez: Things sure looked good after he'd won MVP awards in 1996 and 1998. He might have been a candidate for Steroid Era forgiveness -- the theory already developing is that if everyone was using, you just compare them to their own period -- if he hasn't fallen off the map so abruptly. He hit 40 home runs five times, but he's going to suffer the same fate on the ballot as fellow Steroid Era masher Albert Belle -- one (or two) and done. Out.
* Rafael Palmeiro: This is when five years of perspective can be a great thing; the finger wag in front of Congress might not seem so ridiculous by 2011. Then again, it shouldn't matter: Palmeiro has 569 home runs and 3,020 hits, but was he ever considered one of the best players at his position in his era? If teams had held a dispersal draft in 1995, where would Palmeiro have ranked among first basemen? Behind Frank Thomas and Mark McGwire, certainly, and probably behind Bagwell and Mo Vaughn, too. What differentiated Palmeiro from John Olerud in 1993, at what should have been the height of his career? Not much. Out.
* Larry Walker: His career slugging percentage at Coors Field was .710. That's insane. And he still didn't get to 400 home runs. Out.
In 2012:
* Bernie Williams: Four World Series rings and, um, a jazz CD?
* OK, this ballot of newcomers is a little weak. Jeff Fassero ain't exactly Sandy Koufax.
But in 2013, assuming the players who appear to be retired remain retired:
* Craig Biggio: His election was assured when he reached 3,000 hits, it appears, but it still feels like he should fall under the Rafael Palmeiro corrolary -- if at any point in his career the entire sport held a dispersal draft, would he ever have been taken in the first round? Not once in his career did he receive a first-place vote from MVP voters. Out, but he'll get in.
* Barry Bonds: Especially if he stays out of prison, odds are high that he'll have been forgiven by 2013. He was the best player of the 1990s, after all -- and you can't keep both the sport's all-time leader in hits and its all-time leader in home runs out of the Hall of Fame, can you? In.
* Roger Clemens: He'll be forgiven by 2013, too. In.
* Kenny Lofton: H did play in the postseason in 11 of the final 13 seasons of his career. That has to count for something, doesn't it? Or not. Out.
* Mike Piazza: Probably the best-hitting catcher of all-time. In.
* Curt Schilling: Phew. Here's another tough one. He gets extra credit for the bloody sock, of course, but how much extra credit does he need? He spent his entire career in the tier below Greg Maddux and Randy Johnson, and whether you vote for him might depend on whether you favor a fairly loose Hall of Fame (say, one that includes Jim Rice) or a fairly strict Hall of Fame. Out.
* Sammy Sosa: Even more than Mark McGwire, who already was a great player by the time the word "androstenedione" entered our vocabulary, Sosa is the poster child for the Steroid Era. He hit for next to no power at ages 22 and 23 and made something of a leap at 24 when he hit 33 home runs -- and then made another leap at age 29 when he hit 66 home runs. He wasn't the only one doing whatever it was he had to have been doing, though, so he should get in. If McGwire gets in and Sosa doesn't, it would be a travesty. In.
* David Wells: Did you know he had 14 starts and two saves for the 1992 champion Toronto Blue Jays? Out.
And if the offseason continues to be as cruel to veterans as it has been so far, here's what we're looking at so far for 2014 -- and keep in mind that there'll be inevitable holdover from earlier years:
* Ken Griffey, Jr.: In.
* Tom Glavine: In.
* Trevor Hoffman: In.
* Jeff Kent: In.
* Greg Maddux: In.
* Pedro Martinez: In.
* Mike Mussina: Out.
* Ivan Rodriguez: In.
* John Smoltz: In.
* Frank Thomas: In.
* Omar Vizquel: Out.
That would be by far the largest class in Hall of Fame history. Wouldn't that be an unbelievable weekend?
The cycle of the economy and the crackdown on performance-enhancing anything -- anything stronger than a good cup of coffee, anyway -- has led to a glut of stars facing abrupt retirement. It'll make for a few spectacular afternoons of acceptance speeches at Cooperstown in just a few years.
Henderson is the only sure-fire newcomer to this year's Baseball Hall of Fame ballot. It's a relatively weak class of newcomers that includes good-but-not-great (or even great-but-not-legendary) players like Jay Bell, David Cone, Jesse Orosco and Mo Vaughn -- and that's why many are convinced that Jim Rice, on the ballot for the 15th and final time, finally get enough support to get in.
A player like Don Mattingly, who made his debut on the ballot in 2001, can't count on the same sort of late support, though. By the time Mattingly gets to his 12th or 15th year on the ballot, it's going to be jam-packed with newcomers more deserving of Cooperstown consideration -- and the years of seeing only one player elected, as was the case as recently as 2006, are going to go by the wayside.
Don't forget, too, that Mark McGwire, who probably won't get elected this year, probably will see a swell of support over the next couple of years as fans and writers alike come to grips with the fact that we'll never know who was using steroids in that era and who wasn't.
Here's a selection of the players who will be eligible for election to Cooperstown for the first time in 2010:
* Roberto Alomar: Finished with 2,700 career hits and a .300 average, but his 12 straight All-Star nods tell you about all you need to know. In.
(Note: All-Star selections are not a good way to pick Hall of Famers. For one thing, they completely discount what players do in August and September. Still, though, if you make 12 in a row, you probably were the dominant player at your position for a long time.)
* Barry Larkin: A great player for a long time, but he might end up hurt by the way that Nomar Garciaparra, Derek Jeter and Alex Rodriguez changed the shortstop position. His career numbers -- 2,340 hits, .295 batting average, 198 home runs -- just aren't real impressive for a shortstop anymore. Out, but he might get in anyway.
* Edgar Martinez: Whew. The first great designated hitter and considered one of the best right-handed hitters of the '90s. Except for 1993 and 1994, when he was injured, he hit .300 every year from 1990 until 2001. He'll be a fascinating, fascinating test case. Ultimately, though, what costs him might not be his position but the fact that his career got started too late for him to amass great numbers. (He had just 2,247 career hits and 309 career home runs.) He's my mom's favorite player of the modern era -- or favorite player who didn't play for the 1967 Boston Red Sox -- but it's hard to find a way to get him in. Out.
* Fred McGriff: Remember when 400 home runs meant something? Out.
And in 2011:
* Carlos Baerga: Everything fizzled after he left the Indians. Trouble is, he was still just 27 at that point. Out.
* Jeff Bagwell: So many power-hitting first basemen and outfielders are about to come down the pike. What's the difference between Bagwell and McGriff? One MVP and 47 career home runs. That's it. Out.
(Note: It's going to be really, really interesting to watch the issue of race as these ballots play out. McGriff and Bagwell have virtually the same credentials, but I'd bet money that Bagwell eventually gets into the Hall of Fame while McGriff forever remains on the outside.)
* John Franco: It's hard to see the Hall lowering its standards for relievers, what with the widespread belief that any half-decent starting pitcher could turn himself into a star middle reliever if that's what he wanted to do. Out.
* Juan Gonzalez: Things sure looked good after he'd won MVP awards in 1996 and 1998. He might have been a candidate for Steroid Era forgiveness -- the theory already developing is that if everyone was using, you just compare them to their own period -- if he hasn't fallen off the map so abruptly. He hit 40 home runs five times, but he's going to suffer the same fate on the ballot as fellow Steroid Era masher Albert Belle -- one (or two) and done. Out.
* Rafael Palmeiro: This is when five years of perspective can be a great thing; the finger wag in front of Congress might not seem so ridiculous by 2011. Then again, it shouldn't matter: Palmeiro has 569 home runs and 3,020 hits, but was he ever considered one of the best players at his position in his era? If teams had held a dispersal draft in 1995, where would Palmeiro have ranked among first basemen? Behind Frank Thomas and Mark McGwire, certainly, and probably behind Bagwell and Mo Vaughn, too. What differentiated Palmeiro from John Olerud in 1993, at what should have been the height of his career? Not much. Out.
* Larry Walker: His career slugging percentage at Coors Field was .710. That's insane. And he still didn't get to 400 home runs. Out.
In 2012:
* Bernie Williams: Four World Series rings and, um, a jazz CD?
* OK, this ballot of newcomers is a little weak. Jeff Fassero ain't exactly Sandy Koufax.
But in 2013, assuming the players who appear to be retired remain retired:
* Craig Biggio: His election was assured when he reached 3,000 hits, it appears, but it still feels like he should fall under the Rafael Palmeiro corrolary -- if at any point in his career the entire sport held a dispersal draft, would he ever have been taken in the first round? Not once in his career did he receive a first-place vote from MVP voters. Out, but he'll get in.
* Barry Bonds: Especially if he stays out of prison, odds are high that he'll have been forgiven by 2013. He was the best player of the 1990s, after all -- and you can't keep both the sport's all-time leader in hits and its all-time leader in home runs out of the Hall of Fame, can you? In.
* Roger Clemens: He'll be forgiven by 2013, too. In.
* Kenny Lofton: H did play in the postseason in 11 of the final 13 seasons of his career. That has to count for something, doesn't it? Or not. Out.
* Mike Piazza: Probably the best-hitting catcher of all-time. In.
* Curt Schilling: Phew. Here's another tough one. He gets extra credit for the bloody sock, of course, but how much extra credit does he need? He spent his entire career in the tier below Greg Maddux and Randy Johnson, and whether you vote for him might depend on whether you favor a fairly loose Hall of Fame (say, one that includes Jim Rice) or a fairly strict Hall of Fame. Out.
* Sammy Sosa: Even more than Mark McGwire, who already was a great player by the time the word "androstenedione" entered our vocabulary, Sosa is the poster child for the Steroid Era. He hit for next to no power at ages 22 and 23 and made something of a leap at 24 when he hit 33 home runs -- and then made another leap at age 29 when he hit 66 home runs. He wasn't the only one doing whatever it was he had to have been doing, though, so he should get in. If McGwire gets in and Sosa doesn't, it would be a travesty. In.
* David Wells: Did you know he had 14 starts and two saves for the 1992 champion Toronto Blue Jays? Out.
And if the offseason continues to be as cruel to veterans as it has been so far, here's what we're looking at so far for 2014 -- and keep in mind that there'll be inevitable holdover from earlier years:
* Ken Griffey, Jr.: In.
* Tom Glavine: In.
* Trevor Hoffman: In.
* Jeff Kent: In.
* Greg Maddux: In.
* Pedro Martinez: In.
* Mike Mussina: Out.
* Ivan Rodriguez: In.
* John Smoltz: In.
* Frank Thomas: In.
* Omar Vizquel: Out.
That would be by far the largest class in Hall of Fame history. Wouldn't that be an unbelievable weekend?
The cycle of the economy and the crackdown on performance-enhancing anything -- anything stronger than a good cup of coffee, anyway -- has led to a glut of stars facing abrupt retirement. It'll make for a few spectacular afternoons of acceptance speeches at Cooperstown in just a few years.
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Bay should be first priority for long-term extension
Much has been made in recent weeks about discussions between the Red Sox and representatives for Kevin Youkilis about a long-term contract. The team certainly is right to try to lock up Youkilis, whose ability to get on base, hit for power and play both corner infield spots makes him an immensely valuable player. Youkilis, though, is right to wait and see if another season with 30 home runs and a .390 on-base percentage gives him the leverage to get a better offer than the team-friendly deal for which Dustin Pedroia settled.
There will be, it appears, no long-term deal for Youkilis before April.
That means the Red Sox can turn their attention elsewhere -- say, to Jason Bay.
Bay is entering the final year of a four-year, $18.25 million contract that he signed with the Pittsburgh Pirates back when he was still eligible for arbitration. He made $5.75 million last season and will make $7.5 million with the Red Sox this season.
Needless to say, with the numbers he's produced, he's in line for a hefty raise. And if the Red Sox don't agree to an extension with Bay, they're going to be awfully tempted to turn to Matt Holliday once he hits the market. Trouble is, Holliday is going to be demanding Teixeira-type money for production that may or may not have been inflated by the thin air of Coors Field.
(OK, when we say "may or may not," we mean "may" -- his batting average at Coors Field is 77 points higher than his batting average on the road, and his slugging percentage at Coors Field is 190 points higher than his slugging percentage on the road. To say it another way: At Coors Field, he's Albert Pujols. Away from Coors Field, he's David DeJesus.)
Bay, meanwhile, has proven to be one of the most underrated hitters in the game. Check this out:
Player A (through five seasons)
* .279 batting average, .370 on-base percentage, .491 slugging percentage
Player B (through six seasons)
* .281 batting average, .348 on-base percentage, .498 slugging percentage
Player C (through six seasons)
* .282 batting average, .375 on-base percentage, .516 slugging percentage
Player A is Grady Sizemore. Player B is Justin Morneau. Both are perennially popular with MVP voters; both are well-known by fans everywhere as prodigious offensive talents.
Sizemore, in fact, signed a long-term deal when he was 23 years old, the largest contract ever for a player with less than two years of service time in the major leagues. He'll be looking at a big payday when that deal expires in three years. Morneau, on the other hand, signed a deal last January that will pay him $80 million over the next six years.
Oh, and Player C is Jason Bay.
The Red Sox have the resources to pay Bay what he's worth. They tried to throw $20 million a year at Mark Teixeira, and they would have paid Manny Ramirez $20 million this season had he spent less time being Manny and more time being the best right-handed hitter in the game. There's no reason to let another outstanding hitter slip through their grasp by letting him to get to free agency.
Here's another comparison:
Player A, age 29, through 2,782 at-bats (six seasons)
* .282 batting average, 149 home runs, 491 RBI
* .375 on-base percentage, .516 slugging percentage
Player B, age 29, through 2,667 at-bats (eight seasons)
* .287 batting average, 142 home runs, 409 RBI
* .393 on-base percentage, .514 slugging percentage
Player A is Jason Bay. Player B is the first eight seasons of the career of J.D. Drew.
And while Drew has taken some flack for his susceptibility to injury over the years, no one has ever questioned his ability as a hitter; he's still one of the game's best. Theo Epstein certainly thought so when he signed Drew to a five-year deal worth $70 million.
Come to think of it, that's right in the ballpark where the Red Sox should start with Bay. Five years and $70 million ought to get it done quite nicely.
There will be, it appears, no long-term deal for Youkilis before April.
That means the Red Sox can turn their attention elsewhere -- say, to Jason Bay.
Bay is entering the final year of a four-year, $18.25 million contract that he signed with the Pittsburgh Pirates back when he was still eligible for arbitration. He made $5.75 million last season and will make $7.5 million with the Red Sox this season.
Needless to say, with the numbers he's produced, he's in line for a hefty raise. And if the Red Sox don't agree to an extension with Bay, they're going to be awfully tempted to turn to Matt Holliday once he hits the market. Trouble is, Holliday is going to be demanding Teixeira-type money for production that may or may not have been inflated by the thin air of Coors Field.
(OK, when we say "may or may not," we mean "may" -- his batting average at Coors Field is 77 points higher than his batting average on the road, and his slugging percentage at Coors Field is 190 points higher than his slugging percentage on the road. To say it another way: At Coors Field, he's Albert Pujols. Away from Coors Field, he's David DeJesus.)
Bay, meanwhile, has proven to be one of the most underrated hitters in the game. Check this out:
Player A (through five seasons)
* .279 batting average, .370 on-base percentage, .491 slugging percentage
Player B (through six seasons)
* .281 batting average, .348 on-base percentage, .498 slugging percentage
Player C (through six seasons)
* .282 batting average, .375 on-base percentage, .516 slugging percentage
Player A is Grady Sizemore. Player B is Justin Morneau. Both are perennially popular with MVP voters; both are well-known by fans everywhere as prodigious offensive talents.
Sizemore, in fact, signed a long-term deal when he was 23 years old, the largest contract ever for a player with less than two years of service time in the major leagues. He'll be looking at a big payday when that deal expires in three years. Morneau, on the other hand, signed a deal last January that will pay him $80 million over the next six years.
Oh, and Player C is Jason Bay.
The Red Sox have the resources to pay Bay what he's worth. They tried to throw $20 million a year at Mark Teixeira, and they would have paid Manny Ramirez $20 million this season had he spent less time being Manny and more time being the best right-handed hitter in the game. There's no reason to let another outstanding hitter slip through their grasp by letting him to get to free agency.
Here's another comparison:
Player A, age 29, through 2,782 at-bats (six seasons)
* .282 batting average, 149 home runs, 491 RBI
* .375 on-base percentage, .516 slugging percentage
Player B, age 29, through 2,667 at-bats (eight seasons)
* .287 batting average, 142 home runs, 409 RBI
* .393 on-base percentage, .514 slugging percentage
Player A is Jason Bay. Player B is the first eight seasons of the career of J.D. Drew.
And while Drew has taken some flack for his susceptibility to injury over the years, no one has ever questioned his ability as a hitter; he's still one of the game's best. Theo Epstein certainly thought so when he signed Drew to a five-year deal worth $70 million.
Come to think of it, that's right in the ballpark where the Red Sox should start with Bay. Five years and $70 million ought to get it done quite nicely.
Monday, January 5, 2009
A pointless game with lineups
So now the Rays have Pat Burrell and the Yankees have Mark Teixeira -- and the Red Sox have signed Josh Bard as well as some guy named Nick Green. The fans, as a result, are calling for Theo Epstein to wake up from his winter hibernation and get with the program and make a deal to get the Red Sox some thump in the middle of a lineup that suddenly can't compete with the lineups the Yankees and Rays have assembled this winter.
Or can it?
Let's play a fun and pointless game with the lineups the two teams are expected to field next season and their statistics from our most recent sample -- last season. Those numbers will fluctuate next season, of course, but in a lot of ways, that fluctuation is going to even out. Mike Lowell might be worse because his hip injury lingers, for example, but Jacoby Ellsbury might be better. Johnny Damon might be worse, but Robinson Cano might be better. Pat Burrell might be worse, but B.J. Upton might be better. You get the picture. It's a very, very rough look at the three lineups.
We'll give each team three points if it has the best hitter at each position, two points for second-best, one point for worst. And to keep it objective, we'll keep the identities of the three teams secret until the end.
The statistics included will be fairly simple -- on-base percentage, slugging percentage and OPS (on-base plus slugging). That's in part because those stats tell you more than stats like RBIs and in part because enough fans have memorized the traditional stats of players like Jason Varitek and Mark Teixeira that they'd recognize them right off the bat and ruin the fun of the game.
You'll figure it out anyway, of course, but we'll preserve the suspense for at least a little while.
And because calling them Team A, Team B and Team C seems too boring and too difficult to follow, we'll go all L. Frank Baum on you and call them the Lions, Tigers and Bears. (Yeah, yeah.)
Catcher
Dioner Navarro, Jorge Posada and, at this point, we're going to use Jason Varitek for the Red Sox because it seems incredibly unlikely he signs anywhere else.
Lions: .349 and .407 -- 756
Tigers: .313 and .390 -- 703
Bears: .364 and .411 -- 775
(The Bears get 3 points, the Lions get 2 points, and the Tigers get 1 point.)
First base
Mark Teixeira, Kevin Youkilis and Carlos Pena.
Lions: .377 and .494 -- 873
Tigers: .390 and .569 -- 959
Bears: .410 and .552 -- 962
Second base
Akinori Iwamura, Robinson Cano and Dustin Pedroia.
Lions: .349 and .380 -- 729
Tigers: .376 and .493 -- 869
Bears: .305 and .410 -- 715
Third base
Mike Lowell, Alex Rodriguez and Evan Longoria.
Lions: .343 and .531 -- 874
Tigers: .338 and .461 -- 799
Bears: .392 and .573 -- 965
Shortstop
Jason Bartlett, Jed Lowrie and Derek Jeter.
Lions: .329 and .361 -- 690
Tigers: .339 and .400 -- 739
Bears: .363 and .408 -- 771
(At this point, the Bears have 13 points, the Tigers 9, the Lions 8.)
Left field
Jason Bay, Carl Crawford and Johnny Damon.
Lions: .319 and .400 -- 719
Tigers: .373 and .522 -- 895
Bears: .375 and .461 -- 836
Center field
Melky Cabrera, Jacoby Ellsbury and B.J. Upton.
Lions: .383 and .401 -- 784
Tigers: .339 and .400 -- 739
Bears: .301 and .341 -- 642
Right field
Matt Joyce, Xavier Nady and J.D. Drew.
Lions: .339 and .492 -- 831
Tigers: .408 and .519 -- 927
Bears: .357 and .510 -- 867
Designated hitter
David Ortiz, Pat Burrell and Hideki Matsui.
Lions: .367 and .507 -- 874
Tigers: .369 and .507 -- 876
Bears: .370 and .424 -- 794
How does it end up? The Tigers have 20 points, the Bears have 19, and the Lions have 15.
And who's who? The Tigers are the Red Sox, the Bears are the Yankees and the Lions are the Rays.
Surprise!
Now, I'm not about to claim that the Red Sox do, in fact, have the best lineup in the American League East. Lowell's numbers might tumble further after hip surgery; Ortiz, too, might never regain the power stroke he showed when he had Manny Ramirez hitting behind him.
But for all those sky-is-falling fans who want Theo to sign a power-hitting free agent or deal the entire farm system for Hanley Ramirez -- a deal the Marlins wouldn't do anyway -- it's a little bit of perspective.
The Yankees still have plenty of weaknesses in their lineup -- the entire outfield, for example. The health of Jorge Posada remains a question, too. The Rays have upgraded in right field with the acquisition of Matt Joyce, but he's still not a hitter the caliber of J.D. Drew or even Xavier Nady. And they still have to play Jason Bartlett at shortstop every day.
Oh, and there's still the pitching to think about -- the Red Sox also bring back four of the top 12 pitchers in the American League last season in opposing hitters' OPS. (No returning Yankee starter -- other than Andy Pettitte, if he indeed is returning -- cracked the top 40, though free-agent signee CC Sabathia would fit in right behind league leader Roy Halladay if you count the National League half of his season, too.)
Theo Epstein still has a move or two up his sleeve, we all assume. But even if he doesn't, the Red Sox aren't all of a sudden a third-place team just because the Rays have replaced Willy Aybar with Pat Burrell. This division is very much up in the air.
Or can it?
Let's play a fun and pointless game with the lineups the two teams are expected to field next season and their statistics from our most recent sample -- last season. Those numbers will fluctuate next season, of course, but in a lot of ways, that fluctuation is going to even out. Mike Lowell might be worse because his hip injury lingers, for example, but Jacoby Ellsbury might be better. Johnny Damon might be worse, but Robinson Cano might be better. Pat Burrell might be worse, but B.J. Upton might be better. You get the picture. It's a very, very rough look at the three lineups.
We'll give each team three points if it has the best hitter at each position, two points for second-best, one point for worst. And to keep it objective, we'll keep the identities of the three teams secret until the end.
The statistics included will be fairly simple -- on-base percentage, slugging percentage and OPS (on-base plus slugging). That's in part because those stats tell you more than stats like RBIs and in part because enough fans have memorized the traditional stats of players like Jason Varitek and Mark Teixeira that they'd recognize them right off the bat and ruin the fun of the game.
You'll figure it out anyway, of course, but we'll preserve the suspense for at least a little while.
And because calling them Team A, Team B and Team C seems too boring and too difficult to follow, we'll go all L. Frank Baum on you and call them the Lions, Tigers and Bears. (Yeah, yeah.)
Catcher
Dioner Navarro, Jorge Posada and, at this point, we're going to use Jason Varitek for the Red Sox because it seems incredibly unlikely he signs anywhere else.
Lions: .349 and .407 -- 756
Tigers: .313 and .390 -- 703
Bears: .364 and .411 -- 775
(The Bears get 3 points, the Lions get 2 points, and the Tigers get 1 point.)
First base
Mark Teixeira, Kevin Youkilis and Carlos Pena.
Lions: .377 and .494 -- 873
Tigers: .390 and .569 -- 959
Bears: .410 and .552 -- 962
Second base
Akinori Iwamura, Robinson Cano and Dustin Pedroia.
Lions: .349 and .380 -- 729
Tigers: .376 and .493 -- 869
Bears: .305 and .410 -- 715
Third base
Mike Lowell, Alex Rodriguez and Evan Longoria.
Lions: .343 and .531 -- 874
Tigers: .338 and .461 -- 799
Bears: .392 and .573 -- 965
Shortstop
Jason Bartlett, Jed Lowrie and Derek Jeter.
Lions: .329 and .361 -- 690
Tigers: .339 and .400 -- 739
Bears: .363 and .408 -- 771
(At this point, the Bears have 13 points, the Tigers 9, the Lions 8.)
Left field
Jason Bay, Carl Crawford and Johnny Damon.
Lions: .319 and .400 -- 719
Tigers: .373 and .522 -- 895
Bears: .375 and .461 -- 836
Center field
Melky Cabrera, Jacoby Ellsbury and B.J. Upton.
Lions: .383 and .401 -- 784
Tigers: .339 and .400 -- 739
Bears: .301 and .341 -- 642
Right field
Matt Joyce, Xavier Nady and J.D. Drew.
Lions: .339 and .492 -- 831
Tigers: .408 and .519 -- 927
Bears: .357 and .510 -- 867
Designated hitter
David Ortiz, Pat Burrell and Hideki Matsui.
Lions: .367 and .507 -- 874
Tigers: .369 and .507 -- 876
Bears: .370 and .424 -- 794
How does it end up? The Tigers have 20 points, the Bears have 19, and the Lions have 15.
And who's who? The Tigers are the Red Sox, the Bears are the Yankees and the Lions are the Rays.
Surprise!
Now, I'm not about to claim that the Red Sox do, in fact, have the best lineup in the American League East. Lowell's numbers might tumble further after hip surgery; Ortiz, too, might never regain the power stroke he showed when he had Manny Ramirez hitting behind him.
But for all those sky-is-falling fans who want Theo to sign a power-hitting free agent or deal the entire farm system for Hanley Ramirez -- a deal the Marlins wouldn't do anyway -- it's a little bit of perspective.
The Yankees still have plenty of weaknesses in their lineup -- the entire outfield, for example. The health of Jorge Posada remains a question, too. The Rays have upgraded in right field with the acquisition of Matt Joyce, but he's still not a hitter the caliber of J.D. Drew or even Xavier Nady. And they still have to play Jason Bartlett at shortstop every day.
Oh, and there's still the pitching to think about -- the Red Sox also bring back four of the top 12 pitchers in the American League last season in opposing hitters' OPS. (No returning Yankee starter -- other than Andy Pettitte, if he indeed is returning -- cracked the top 40, though free-agent signee CC Sabathia would fit in right behind league leader Roy Halladay if you count the National League half of his season, too.)
Theo Epstein still has a move or two up his sleeve, we all assume. But even if he doesn't, the Red Sox aren't all of a sudden a third-place team just because the Rays have replaced Willy Aybar with Pat Burrell. This division is very much up in the air.
Report: Patriots to franchise Cassel
Several news outlets, starting with the National Football Post, are reporting that the Patriots will franchise Matt Cassel and keep him as insurance against a setback in Tom Brady's recovery.
If that's true, it would mean the Patriots would have made up their minds awfully early in the offseason; they don't have to make the decision to use the franchise tag until Feb. 19, and free agency doesn't begin until Feb. 27.
And why would they make this sort of decision so early? There's only one plausible reason -- the Patriots already anticipate that Brady won't be ready to start the season next fall, so much so that they're willing to tie up 20 percent of their salary cap in the quarterback position.
The good news is that the franchise tender only guarantees a one-year contract, which means the Patriots won't have to pay Cassel after the 2009 season, when a slew of important contracts start to expire and will need extending.
If that's true, it would mean the Patriots would have made up their minds awfully early in the offseason; they don't have to make the decision to use the franchise tag until Feb. 19, and free agency doesn't begin until Feb. 27.
And why would they make this sort of decision so early? There's only one plausible reason -- the Patriots already anticipate that Brady won't be ready to start the season next fall, so much so that they're willing to tie up 20 percent of their salary cap in the quarterback position.
The good news is that the franchise tender only guarantees a one-year contract, which means the Patriots won't have to pay Cassel after the 2009 season, when a slew of important contracts start to expire and will need extending.
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Cassel dilemma presents pros and cons everywhere
The next couple of months will be critical as the Patriots assess where they stand and what they want to do with Matt Cassel. Here are a few pros and cons they'll be weighing:
Franchise Matt Cassel and keep him.
Pro: You know you have a quarterback who's healthy and who can succeed in your system -- perhaps the most important ingredient for a championship football team. And if Brady is healthy, you know you have a company guy who would probably be willing to hold a clipboard once again -- particularly with 13 or 14 big ones lining his wallet.
Con: You're spending somewhere around $28 million -- more than 20 percent of a salary cap expected to be in the ballpark of $125 million -- at the quarterback position. It helps that you don't have any huge free-agent needs this season, but you're going to need some spare change soon to work out long-term extensions for Vince Wilfork, Richard Seymour, Ellis Hobbs and Logan Mankins, all of whom will hit the open market after the 2009 season.
You're also spending $14 million on a quarterback who hadn't started a game since high school, a quarterback who might or might not be a product of the Patriots' system and the Patriots' talented wide receivers. Who's to say Kevin O'Connell couldn't do the same thing should Brady not recover in time to start next season?
Franchise Matt Cassel and try to trade him.
Pro: You get some sort of compensation for a guy who might be one of the hottest commodities on the quarterback market this offseason. Why wouldn't the Vikings trade a second-round pick for Cassel? What are they going to do, stick with Tarvaris Jackson?
Con: What if you can't trade him? What if there's no team that wants to trade a second-round pick for a guy who maybe already has signed the $14 million franchise tender? Sure, they could ask him to tear it up for a long-term deal, but given the fact that no NFL contracts actually guarantee anything long-term, why would he?
Let Matt Cassel walk and receive no compensation.
Pro: None of the headaches, both in the locker room and in the salary-cap calculations, that come along with paying two quarterbacks $14 million apiece. You also know that you only spent a seventh-round pick on Cassel and got one amazing season for pretty much nothing; it's almost unfair to ask for more compensation than that.
Con: If you've got a shot either to insure yourself against a Brady setback or to get an extra second-round pick, shouldn't you give it a shot?
Franchise Matt Cassel and keep him.
Pro: You know you have a quarterback who's healthy and who can succeed in your system -- perhaps the most important ingredient for a championship football team. And if Brady is healthy, you know you have a company guy who would probably be willing to hold a clipboard once again -- particularly with 13 or 14 big ones lining his wallet.
Con: You're spending somewhere around $28 million -- more than 20 percent of a salary cap expected to be in the ballpark of $125 million -- at the quarterback position. It helps that you don't have any huge free-agent needs this season, but you're going to need some spare change soon to work out long-term extensions for Vince Wilfork, Richard Seymour, Ellis Hobbs and Logan Mankins, all of whom will hit the open market after the 2009 season.
You're also spending $14 million on a quarterback who hadn't started a game since high school, a quarterback who might or might not be a product of the Patriots' system and the Patriots' talented wide receivers. Who's to say Kevin O'Connell couldn't do the same thing should Brady not recover in time to start next season?
Franchise Matt Cassel and try to trade him.
Pro: You get some sort of compensation for a guy who might be one of the hottest commodities on the quarterback market this offseason. Why wouldn't the Vikings trade a second-round pick for Cassel? What are they going to do, stick with Tarvaris Jackson?
Con: What if you can't trade him? What if there's no team that wants to trade a second-round pick for a guy who maybe already has signed the $14 million franchise tender? Sure, they could ask him to tear it up for a long-term deal, but given the fact that no NFL contracts actually guarantee anything long-term, why would he?
Let Matt Cassel walk and receive no compensation.
Pro: None of the headaches, both in the locker room and in the salary-cap calculations, that come along with paying two quarterbacks $14 million apiece. You also know that you only spent a seventh-round pick on Cassel and got one amazing season for pretty much nothing; it's almost unfair to ask for more compensation than that.
Con: If you've got a shot either to insure yourself against a Brady setback or to get an extra second-round pick, shouldn't you give it a shot?
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Bard signing raises questions about Varitek, Wakefield
No one, apparently, seems to be wondering about the Red Sox's signing of catcher Josh Bard to a one-year deal. Bard, we all remember, was supposed to be a replacement for Doug Mirabelli as Tim Wakefield's personal catcher; he instead was a disaster and was shipped to San Diego for Mirabelli in a deal that cost the Red Sox reliever Cla Meredith.
It's almost baffling that the Red Sox would sign Bard again, especially to anything more than a minor-league contract or the major-league minimum. We already know he can't catch the knuckleball. And if he can't catch the knuckleball, why would the Red Sox sign him?
Some possibilities:
Jason Varitek, a free agent for whom there seems to be next to no market, could return and catch Wakefield.
This makes some semblance of sense; the Red Sox might have decided that it's not worth having a catcher like Mirabelli or Kevin Cash who provides next to nothing offensively -- particularly since Wakefield is the sort of pitcher for whom you need to score as many runs as possible. But Varitek has only caught
The last time Varitek caught Wakefield more than once in the regular season was 2005 -- and in opponents' 112 plate appearances against that battery, they hit .311 and reched base at a .432 clip. In their 831 plate appearances with Mirabelli catching, opponents hit .237 and reached base at a .290 clip.
Varitek hasn't caught Wakefield more than four times in a season since 2002. It's conceivable the Red Sox could try it again, but it seems an odd thing to do at this point in his career.
Then again, maybe the Red Sox still anticipate trading for another young catcher (i.e. Jarrod Saltalamacchia) and have faith that he could catch Wakefield better than Bard ever did.
Tim Wakefield's days are numbered in the Red Sox rotation.
This is the other one. The Red Sox picked up Tim Wakefield's perpetual $4 million option after the season because it made too much sense not to do so; anytime you can get a useful arm for $4 million, you do it.
But that doesn't necessarily mean he's guaranteed a spot in the rotation, either. As it stands now, there are seven or eight candidates for those five spots, and Wakefield is the only one who requires a catcher with a unique talent -- which apparently also requires a unique inability to hit better than .230 -- behind the plate.
Jon Lester, Josh Beckett and Daisuke Matsuzaka are assured of their spots. The last two spots, though, will come down to Wakefield, Clay Buchholz, Michael Bowden, Justin Masterson and the about-to-be-signed Brad Penny. If Penny is healthy, he's an All-Star-caliber pitcher. If Buchholz shows in spring training he's past the jitters of a season ago, he's capable of making a Lester-type leap. And if both pitch the way they're capable of pitching, there might not be a spot for Wakefield.
What then? Do they put him in the bullpen? Long relief? An ego-bruising trip to Pawtucket? Or does he ride off into the sunset of his career -- and thus make Josh Bard's inability to catch the knuckleball completely irrelevant?
It's almost baffling that the Red Sox would sign Bard again, especially to anything more than a minor-league contract or the major-league minimum. We already know he can't catch the knuckleball. And if he can't catch the knuckleball, why would the Red Sox sign him?
Some possibilities:
Jason Varitek, a free agent for whom there seems to be next to no market, could return and catch Wakefield.
This makes some semblance of sense; the Red Sox might have decided that it's not worth having a catcher like Mirabelli or Kevin Cash who provides next to nothing offensively -- particularly since Wakefield is the sort of pitcher for whom you need to score as many runs as possible. But Varitek has only caught
The last time Varitek caught Wakefield more than once in the regular season was 2005 -- and in opponents' 112 plate appearances against that battery, they hit .311 and reched base at a .432 clip. In their 831 plate appearances with Mirabelli catching, opponents hit .237 and reached base at a .290 clip.
Varitek hasn't caught Wakefield more than four times in a season since 2002. It's conceivable the Red Sox could try it again, but it seems an odd thing to do at this point in his career.
Then again, maybe the Red Sox still anticipate trading for another young catcher (i.e. Jarrod Saltalamacchia) and have faith that he could catch Wakefield better than Bard ever did.
Tim Wakefield's days are numbered in the Red Sox rotation.
This is the other one. The Red Sox picked up Tim Wakefield's perpetual $4 million option after the season because it made too much sense not to do so; anytime you can get a useful arm for $4 million, you do it.
But that doesn't necessarily mean he's guaranteed a spot in the rotation, either. As it stands now, there are seven or eight candidates for those five spots, and Wakefield is the only one who requires a catcher with a unique talent -- which apparently also requires a unique inability to hit better than .230 -- behind the plate.
Jon Lester, Josh Beckett and Daisuke Matsuzaka are assured of their spots. The last two spots, though, will come down to Wakefield, Clay Buchholz, Michael Bowden, Justin Masterson and the about-to-be-signed Brad Penny. If Penny is healthy, he's an All-Star-caliber pitcher. If Buchholz shows in spring training he's past the jitters of a season ago, he's capable of making a Lester-type leap. And if both pitch the way they're capable of pitching, there might not be a spot for Wakefield.
What then? Do they put him in the bullpen? Long relief? An ego-bruising trip to Pawtucket? Or does he ride off into the sunset of his career -- and thus make Josh Bard's inability to catch the knuckleball completely irrelevant?
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Is Sammy Morris the long-term answer at running back?
Another question the Patriots face this offseason, on top of those laid out here, is how to approach their situation at running back.
Patriots running backs had a spectacular season; the team rushed for more yards (2,135) than it had in any season since 1985. Sammy Morris rushed for 727 yards in 13 games this season and averaged 4.7 yards per carry -- and he memorably ran right over hard-hitting Buffalo safety Donte Whitner on Sunday. Among running backs with as many carries (156) as Morris this season, only six had a better yards-per-carry average.
LaMont Jordan missed two months in the middle of the season but rushed for 97, 78 and 64 yards in his three full games back from injury. He also rushed for 62 yards on 11 carries in Week 2 against the Jets, his last game with more than 10 carries before he got hurt.
Laurence Maroney played in just three games this season before going on injured reserve. Last season, he played in 13 games and started six; he rushed for 835 yards (with an average of 4.5 yards per carry) in that time. It's not far-fetched to wonder if Maroney ever is going to make it.
Morris is under contract for two more seasons. Maroney is under contract for two more seasons. Jordan is an unrestricted free agent.
There are two big questions: Who comes back? Who comes in?
Jordan isn't necessarily a feature back; he rushed for 1,000 yards in 2005 with the Oakland Raiders, but he spent four years as a complementary back with the New York Jets and seemed to be a perfect fit as a complementary back with the Patriots this season. If he's willing to come back on those terms, the Patriots would be foolish not to sign him. If he wants to make the same money as starting running backs, though, the Patriots likely will let him walk.
Maroney might get one last chance to prove himself; then again, this season might have been his one last chance. He might be done as a Patriot. Then again, his salary against the cap ($1.6 million according to this very unofficial source) is less than the cap hit the Patriots would take ($2.1 million) if they cut him after June 1. His contract doesn't expire until 2010. Either way, the Patriots certainly are not going to count on him as a starting running back next season.
Morris is the wild card. The Patriots have to decide this winter and spring if he's capable of being a starting running back on a championship-caliber team or not. He played awfully well this season when healthy; his contribution was a critical part of the Patriots' getting to 11 wins. But he's still going to be 32 years old next season, and the production of running backs can drop precipitously once they hit their early 30s.
The Patriots easily could bring back Morris and Jordan, cut Maroney and keep BenJarvus Green-Ellis as a third running back. But if they don't want to bank on Morris or Maroney, they could go after a running back in this spring's draft and try to find an impact player in the first round. Chris Johnson (first round, Tennessee), Jonathan Stewart (first round, Carolina), Matt Forte (second round, Chicago), Ray Rice (second round, Baltimore), Steve Slaton (third round, Houston) and Tim Hightower (fifth round, Arizona) all had great rookie seasons.
One possible fit for the Patriots? Pittsburgh's LeSean McCoy should be available late in the first round; Georgia's Knowshon Moreno and Ohio State's Beanie Wells might slip, too. Iowa's Shonn Greene, coached by Belichick protege Kirk Ferentz, rushed for 1,729 yards this season and won the Doak Walker Award as the nation's top college running back; he will make his decision about an NFL jump in the coming weeks. He might be a late first-round talent, which is right where the Patriots will be picking.
Patriots running backs had a spectacular season; the team rushed for more yards (2,135) than it had in any season since 1985. Sammy Morris rushed for 727 yards in 13 games this season and averaged 4.7 yards per carry -- and he memorably ran right over hard-hitting Buffalo safety Donte Whitner on Sunday. Among running backs with as many carries (156) as Morris this season, only six had a better yards-per-carry average.
LaMont Jordan missed two months in the middle of the season but rushed for 97, 78 and 64 yards in his three full games back from injury. He also rushed for 62 yards on 11 carries in Week 2 against the Jets, his last game with more than 10 carries before he got hurt.
Laurence Maroney played in just three games this season before going on injured reserve. Last season, he played in 13 games and started six; he rushed for 835 yards (with an average of 4.5 yards per carry) in that time. It's not far-fetched to wonder if Maroney ever is going to make it.
Morris is under contract for two more seasons. Maroney is under contract for two more seasons. Jordan is an unrestricted free agent.
There are two big questions: Who comes back? Who comes in?
Jordan isn't necessarily a feature back; he rushed for 1,000 yards in 2005 with the Oakland Raiders, but he spent four years as a complementary back with the New York Jets and seemed to be a perfect fit as a complementary back with the Patriots this season. If he's willing to come back on those terms, the Patriots would be foolish not to sign him. If he wants to make the same money as starting running backs, though, the Patriots likely will let him walk.
Maroney might get one last chance to prove himself; then again, this season might have been his one last chance. He might be done as a Patriot. Then again, his salary against the cap ($1.6 million according to this very unofficial source) is less than the cap hit the Patriots would take ($2.1 million) if they cut him after June 1. His contract doesn't expire until 2010. Either way, the Patriots certainly are not going to count on him as a starting running back next season.
Morris is the wild card. The Patriots have to decide this winter and spring if he's capable of being a starting running back on a championship-caliber team or not. He played awfully well this season when healthy; his contribution was a critical part of the Patriots' getting to 11 wins. But he's still going to be 32 years old next season, and the production of running backs can drop precipitously once they hit their early 30s.
The Patriots easily could bring back Morris and Jordan, cut Maroney and keep BenJarvus Green-Ellis as a third running back. But if they don't want to bank on Morris or Maroney, they could go after a running back in this spring's draft and try to find an impact player in the first round. Chris Johnson (first round, Tennessee), Jonathan Stewart (first round, Carolina), Matt Forte (second round, Chicago), Ray Rice (second round, Baltimore), Steve Slaton (third round, Houston) and Tim Hightower (fifth round, Arizona) all had great rookie seasons.
One possible fit for the Patriots? Pittsburgh's LeSean McCoy should be available late in the first round; Georgia's Knowshon Moreno and Ohio State's Beanie Wells might slip, too. Iowa's Shonn Greene, coached by Belichick protege Kirk Ferentz, rushed for 1,729 yards this season and won the Doak Walker Award as the nation's top college running back; he will make his decision about an NFL jump in the coming weeks. He might be a late first-round talent, which is right where the Patriots will be picking.
Sunday, December 28, 2008
What do we know about the Patriots?
An interesting discussion unfolded among some of the reporters waiting for the Patriots to return to Gillette Stadium on Sunday night: What have we learned about the Patriots after a 16-game season? What do we know for certain?
The consensus answer: Not much.
This is a team that feasted on the dregs on the NFL: The Patriots won by at least 20 points three times, including back-to-back routs of Oakland and Arizona this month. This also is a team that got its butt kicked when it didn't show up: The Patriots lost by at least 20 points three times, including a 33-10 whipping at the hands of the Pittsburgh Steelers in a demoralizing game at the end of November.
This is a team with zero quality wins. Technically, they did beat playoff teams in Arizona and Miami, but no one's confusing either of those teams with juggernauts. And with chances to beat other contenders like San Diego, Indianapolis and Pittsburgh, the Patriots fell flat. (They did have a chance to beat Indianapolis in the fourth quarter, but that also was before the Colts turned into the steam-roller that might be considered the favorite to win the AFC, particularly if Pittsburgh's Ben Roethlisberger misses time with his concussion.)
All that tells you is that the Patriots were neither terrible nor outstanding.
This also is a team with a roster of players that's difficult to evaluate.
Matt Cassel played great this season, but no one knows (a) how well he'd play next season if Tom Brady wasn't available, or (b) how well he'd play for a quarterback-hungry team like the Vikings once he was out of the Patriots' system.
Gary Guyton was a serviceable fill-in at linebacker for an aging and then injured Tedy Bruschi, but is he really an NFL starter? It's hard to know. Fellow undrafted rookie BenJarvus Green-Ellis sure looked like an NFL starter for a couple of games, but the fact that the Patriots scratched him for almost the entire month of December has to tell you something.
Is Jonathan Wilhite a contributor or a fill-in? Will the offensive line remain intact? What position is Brandon Meriweather going to play long-term? Tough to know.
About all we know after this season is that Wes Welker is no one-year fluke and that Jerod Mayo is the real deal at linebacker. We know that Stephen Gostkowski is a keeper, and we know that you can win games with Sammy Morris as your best running back. We know that Josh McDaniels is a hot commodity on the coaching market, and we know that Bill Belichick is sensational when it comes to juggling roster parts.
Injuries can be used as an excuse for just about anything. And if there's an excuse for just about everything, it's hard to learn many lessons from this past season.
The consensus answer: Not much.
This is a team that feasted on the dregs on the NFL: The Patriots won by at least 20 points three times, including back-to-back routs of Oakland and Arizona this month. This also is a team that got its butt kicked when it didn't show up: The Patriots lost by at least 20 points three times, including a 33-10 whipping at the hands of the Pittsburgh Steelers in a demoralizing game at the end of November.
This is a team with zero quality wins. Technically, they did beat playoff teams in Arizona and Miami, but no one's confusing either of those teams with juggernauts. And with chances to beat other contenders like San Diego, Indianapolis and Pittsburgh, the Patriots fell flat. (They did have a chance to beat Indianapolis in the fourth quarter, but that also was before the Colts turned into the steam-roller that might be considered the favorite to win the AFC, particularly if Pittsburgh's Ben Roethlisberger misses time with his concussion.)
All that tells you is that the Patriots were neither terrible nor outstanding.
This also is a team with a roster of players that's difficult to evaluate.
Matt Cassel played great this season, but no one knows (a) how well he'd play next season if Tom Brady wasn't available, or (b) how well he'd play for a quarterback-hungry team like the Vikings once he was out of the Patriots' system.
Gary Guyton was a serviceable fill-in at linebacker for an aging and then injured Tedy Bruschi, but is he really an NFL starter? It's hard to know. Fellow undrafted rookie BenJarvus Green-Ellis sure looked like an NFL starter for a couple of games, but the fact that the Patriots scratched him for almost the entire month of December has to tell you something.
Is Jonathan Wilhite a contributor or a fill-in? Will the offensive line remain intact? What position is Brandon Meriweather going to play long-term? Tough to know.
About all we know after this season is that Wes Welker is no one-year fluke and that Jerod Mayo is the real deal at linebacker. We know that Stephen Gostkowski is a keeper, and we know that you can win games with Sammy Morris as your best running back. We know that Josh McDaniels is a hot commodity on the coaching market, and we know that Bill Belichick is sensational when it comes to juggling roster parts.
Injuries can be used as an excuse for just about anything. And if there's an excuse for just about everything, it's hard to learn many lessons from this past season.
Pats' depth at running back the difference against Bills
The injured players New England had to put on the shelf for the duration of the season, more than a dozen in all, have been greatly missed.
Two of the injured players who came back, though, were the ones who saved the Patriots’ season.
LaMont Jordan and Sammy Morris each missed time with injuries this season; Morris missed three games with a knee injury, and Jordan missed a month and a half with a calf injury. But the two rushed for a combined 214 yards in a rout of the Oakland Raiders and 166 yards in another pounding of the Arizona Cardinals last week.
That meant the Patriots had three running backs, when you throw in the ever-versatile Kevin Faulk, to pound against the Bills’ defense in a game in which neither team threw a pass into the wind in the first half.
The Bills, meanwhile, had Fred Jackson and no one else. Jackson rushed for 103 yards in the first half but almost nothing in the second half as the New England defense seized control of a game the Patriots had to win. Part of it had to do with the score. Part of it had to do with the fact that Jackson, even up against a retirement-home linebacking corps, couldn't do it all by himself.
When the Bills needed to convert on fourth-and-1 in the fourth quarter, it wasn’t Jackson who had the ball. Jackson was barely a decoy. Instead, Trent Edwards missed Josh Reed with a pass into the flat, and with that, the game effectively was over.
But the Patriots had Jordan (38 yards on eight first-half carries) and Morris (29 yards on 11 carries) still fresh and Faulk still available. That paid off in a big way in the second half. Morris finished with 84 rushing yards; he had 55 yards on 13 carries after halftime. Jordan finished with 64 rushing yards. Faulk caught an eight-yard pass for a first down.
The depth of the Patriots' corps of running backs decided this game. How else could Morris have been fresh enough to run straight through Bills safety Donte Whitner on the final play of the third quarter?
This wasn’t just a good season for the Patriots’ run game. This was a historic season for the Patriots’ run game. Not since 1985 had the Patriots rushed for this many yards; not since 1981 had the Patriots rushed for this many touchdowns.
When Tom Brady went down, it felt like the season was over. When Laurence Maroney went down, it felt like the Patriots would have to survive with a dominant pass game (in the hands of star receivers Randy Moss and Wes Welker) and a patchwork run game.
Instead, the team won 11 games and would have earned a playoff bid if just one of any number of things had gone their way. And without Morris, Jordan, Faulk and even BenJarvus Green-Ellis, who rushed for at least 50 yards three times after Morris and Jordan went down, this team wouldn't have had anywhere close to 11 wins.
Two of the injured players who came back, though, were the ones who saved the Patriots’ season.
LaMont Jordan and Sammy Morris each missed time with injuries this season; Morris missed three games with a knee injury, and Jordan missed a month and a half with a calf injury. But the two rushed for a combined 214 yards in a rout of the Oakland Raiders and 166 yards in another pounding of the Arizona Cardinals last week.
That meant the Patriots had three running backs, when you throw in the ever-versatile Kevin Faulk, to pound against the Bills’ defense in a game in which neither team threw a pass into the wind in the first half.
The Bills, meanwhile, had Fred Jackson and no one else. Jackson rushed for 103 yards in the first half but almost nothing in the second half as the New England defense seized control of a game the Patriots had to win. Part of it had to do with the score. Part of it had to do with the fact that Jackson, even up against a retirement-home linebacking corps, couldn't do it all by himself.
When the Bills needed to convert on fourth-and-1 in the fourth quarter, it wasn’t Jackson who had the ball. Jackson was barely a decoy. Instead, Trent Edwards missed Josh Reed with a pass into the flat, and with that, the game effectively was over.
But the Patriots had Jordan (38 yards on eight first-half carries) and Morris (29 yards on 11 carries) still fresh and Faulk still available. That paid off in a big way in the second half. Morris finished with 84 rushing yards; he had 55 yards on 13 carries after halftime. Jordan finished with 64 rushing yards. Faulk caught an eight-yard pass for a first down.
The depth of the Patriots' corps of running backs decided this game. How else could Morris have been fresh enough to run straight through Bills safety Donte Whitner on the final play of the third quarter?
This wasn’t just a good season for the Patriots’ run game. This was a historic season for the Patriots’ run game. Not since 1985 had the Patriots rushed for this many yards; not since 1981 had the Patriots rushed for this many touchdowns.
When Tom Brady went down, it felt like the season was over. When Laurence Maroney went down, it felt like the Patriots would have to survive with a dominant pass game (in the hands of star receivers Randy Moss and Wes Welker) and a patchwork run game.
Instead, the team won 11 games and would have earned a playoff bid if just one of any number of things had gone their way. And without Morris, Jordan, Faulk and even BenJarvus Green-Ellis, who rushed for at least 50 yards three times after Morris and Jordan went down, this team wouldn't have had anywhere close to 11 wins.
Play of the game a punt?
The play of today's Patriots game might have been a punt -- and not even the surprise 57-yarder that Matt Cassel unleashed on third-and-8 in the fourth quarter.
It was the punt that set up the game's only touchdown.
Punting into the wind today was almost impossible; the swirling winds made it difficult even to punt with the wind at the kicker's back. Brian Moorman opened the game with a 13-yard punt, and it didn't get much easier from there. Moorman's second punt was better, but he got it too high and the wind knocked it down after 35 yards.
By the time Hanson had to punt on fourth-and-12 early in the third quarter, he hadn't yet had to punt into the wind. (He'd dropped a 35-yarder inside the 20 in the first quarter, but it skipped off the hands of Leodis McKelvin and into the end zone.) He'd only had a chance to watch what the wind did when Moorman kicked -- and what the wind did when both teams' field-goal kickers tried to take aim at the uprights.
But facing the wind earl in the third quarter, Hanson unleased a low line drive that took a friendly hop and went for 46 yards, turning lousy field position -- Hanson was standing inside his own 10-yard line -- into friendly field position. The Bills had to take over at their own 36.
And the Bills had only made it to midfield when Jarvis Green strip-sacked Trent Edwards to force the game's only turnover. Eleven plays later, including a Matt Cassel designed run on fourth-and-2, the game's most brilliant play call, the Patriots were in the end zone and had a 10-0 lead.
Cassel's run was fantastic. LaMont Jordan and Sammy Morris were relentless. But if Hanson shanked that punt from deep in his own end, the entire game might have changed.
It was the punt that set up the game's only touchdown.
Punting into the wind today was almost impossible; the swirling winds made it difficult even to punt with the wind at the kicker's back. Brian Moorman opened the game with a 13-yard punt, and it didn't get much easier from there. Moorman's second punt was better, but he got it too high and the wind knocked it down after 35 yards.
By the time Hanson had to punt on fourth-and-12 early in the third quarter, he hadn't yet had to punt into the wind. (He'd dropped a 35-yarder inside the 20 in the first quarter, but it skipped off the hands of Leodis McKelvin and into the end zone.) He'd only had a chance to watch what the wind did when Moorman kicked -- and what the wind did when both teams' field-goal kickers tried to take aim at the uprights.
But facing the wind earl in the third quarter, Hanson unleased a low line drive that took a friendly hop and went for 46 yards, turning lousy field position -- Hanson was standing inside his own 10-yard line -- into friendly field position. The Bills had to take over at their own 36.
And the Bills had only made it to midfield when Jarvis Green strip-sacked Trent Edwards to force the game's only turnover. Eleven plays later, including a Matt Cassel designed run on fourth-and-2, the game's most brilliant play call, the Patriots were in the end zone and had a 10-0 lead.
Cassel's run was fantastic. LaMont Jordan and Sammy Morris were relentless. But if Hanson shanked that punt from deep in his own end, the entire game might have changed.
Friday, December 26, 2008
Don't overrate Yankees too much
Yep, Mark Teixeira is a great hitter. Yep, Teixeira and Alex Rodriguez form a 3-4 punch in the middle of the Yankees' lineup that rivals anything David Ortiz and Manny Ramirez ever did or were.
Let's keep things in perspective, though. Let's not get too carried away. Let's remember that the rest of the Yankees' lineup is full of players who aren't close to the level at which Teixeira and A-Rod play the game.
Here's what the Yankees' lineup looked like last season on Opening Day:
Damon, LF (34 years old, .303, 17 HRs)
Jeter, SS (34, .300, 11)
Abreu, RF (34, .296, 20)
Rodriguez, 3B (32, .305, 35)
Giambi, 1B (37, .247, 32)
Cano, 2B (25, .271, 14)
Posada, C (36, .216, 3)
Matsui, DH (34, .294, 9)
Cabrera, CF (23, .249, 8)
Here's what the Yankees' lineup likely will look like this season on Opening Day, barring further moves:
Damon, LF (now 35 years old)
Jeter, SS (to be 35)
Teixeira, 1B (to be 28; .308 and 33 last season)
Rodriguez, 3B (to be 35)
Swisher, CF (now 28; .219 and 24)
Nady, RF (now 30; .305 and 25)
Matsui, DH (to be 35)
Posada, C (to be 37 going on 67)
Cano, 2B (now 26)
Is it better?
Yes, Teixeira is an upgrade. But in case you didn't notice, Jason Giambi had a fine season last season. Giambi hit .247, sure, but he reached base at a .373 clip -- and he hit 32 home runs. Teixeira, on the other hand, reached base at a .410 clip. That's the type of upgrade we're talking about. Thirty-seven on-base percentage points. And in power, it's a wash. Teixeira also is, of course, a tremendous defensive first baseman, and that's going to help, but you don't win championships with your defense at first base.
Swisher and Nady likewise will be big contributors for an outfield that otherwise would consist of senior citizens (Damon and Matsui) and youngsters who haven't yet done anything (Cabrera and Brett Gardner). Rodriguez is still Rodriguez; his numbers in 2008 were at least equal to the numbers he had back when he was a young pup in Seattle.
But the rest of the lineup is old and getting older. Jeter has seen his on-base percentage and slugging percentage drop in each of the past three seasons; it was .417 and .483 in 2006 and .363 and .408 in 2008. It's not a precipitous drop, but it's also not a good trend for a guy who's got a lot of mileage on him already. Posada's ability to play catcher every day is so questionable that some assumed the Yankees would avoid Teixeira just so Posada could play first base once in a while.
Yes, there's still the pitching. No matter what some are saying, trading Mike Mussina (20 wins and a 3.37 ERA at age 39) for CC Sabathia (a workhorse who will turn 29 this season) does not represent treading water. The Yankees are a better pitching staff with Sabathia. They're also a better pitching staff with A.J. Burnett than with Andy Pettitte, Sidney Ponson or Darrell Rasner. There's no question about that, no matter what Burnett's injury or attitude history.
But the rotation still is going to include at least one of the young arms and probably two -- Joba Chamberlain and either Phil Hughes or Ian Kennedy. Chamberlain had a 2.76 ERA and saw opponents hit .245 against him as a starter this year; don't be surprised if he makes a Jon Lester-like leap this season. But Hughes and Kennedy both bombed, and there's no guarantee they're going to rebound right away. Plenty of overhyped young pitchers have bombed and never made it; just ask the late '90s Red Sox.
Some believe the Yankees spent extravagently to buy themselves the American League East. If you break it down, though, you'll find that the Yankees spent almost half a billion dollars to do just a little more than tread water. They -- unlike the Red Sox -- needed Teixeira just to tread water. The race is far from over. In fact, it's just getting interesting.
Let's keep things in perspective, though. Let's not get too carried away. Let's remember that the rest of the Yankees' lineup is full of players who aren't close to the level at which Teixeira and A-Rod play the game.
Here's what the Yankees' lineup looked like last season on Opening Day:
Damon, LF (34 years old, .303, 17 HRs)
Jeter, SS (34, .300, 11)
Abreu, RF (34, .296, 20)
Rodriguez, 3B (32, .305, 35)
Giambi, 1B (37, .247, 32)
Cano, 2B (25, .271, 14)
Posada, C (36, .216, 3)
Matsui, DH (34, .294, 9)
Cabrera, CF (23, .249, 8)
Here's what the Yankees' lineup likely will look like this season on Opening Day, barring further moves:
Damon, LF (now 35 years old)
Jeter, SS (to be 35)
Teixeira, 1B (to be 28; .308 and 33 last season)
Rodriguez, 3B (to be 35)
Swisher, CF (now 28; .219 and 24)
Nady, RF (now 30; .305 and 25)
Matsui, DH (to be 35)
Posada, C (to be 37 going on 67)
Cano, 2B (now 26)
Is it better?
Yes, Teixeira is an upgrade. But in case you didn't notice, Jason Giambi had a fine season last season. Giambi hit .247, sure, but he reached base at a .373 clip -- and he hit 32 home runs. Teixeira, on the other hand, reached base at a .410 clip. That's the type of upgrade we're talking about. Thirty-seven on-base percentage points. And in power, it's a wash. Teixeira also is, of course, a tremendous defensive first baseman, and that's going to help, but you don't win championships with your defense at first base.
Swisher and Nady likewise will be big contributors for an outfield that otherwise would consist of senior citizens (Damon and Matsui) and youngsters who haven't yet done anything (Cabrera and Brett Gardner). Rodriguez is still Rodriguez; his numbers in 2008 were at least equal to the numbers he had back when he was a young pup in Seattle.
But the rest of the lineup is old and getting older. Jeter has seen his on-base percentage and slugging percentage drop in each of the past three seasons; it was .417 and .483 in 2006 and .363 and .408 in 2008. It's not a precipitous drop, but it's also not a good trend for a guy who's got a lot of mileage on him already. Posada's ability to play catcher every day is so questionable that some assumed the Yankees would avoid Teixeira just so Posada could play first base once in a while.
Yes, there's still the pitching. No matter what some are saying, trading Mike Mussina (20 wins and a 3.37 ERA at age 39) for CC Sabathia (a workhorse who will turn 29 this season) does not represent treading water. The Yankees are a better pitching staff with Sabathia. They're also a better pitching staff with A.J. Burnett than with Andy Pettitte, Sidney Ponson or Darrell Rasner. There's no question about that, no matter what Burnett's injury or attitude history.
But the rotation still is going to include at least one of the young arms and probably two -- Joba Chamberlain and either Phil Hughes or Ian Kennedy. Chamberlain had a 2.76 ERA and saw opponents hit .245 against him as a starter this year; don't be surprised if he makes a Jon Lester-like leap this season. But Hughes and Kennedy both bombed, and there's no guarantee they're going to rebound right away. Plenty of overhyped young pitchers have bombed and never made it; just ask the late '90s Red Sox.
Some believe the Yankees spent extravagently to buy themselves the American League East. If you break it down, though, you'll find that the Yankees spent almost half a billion dollars to do just a little more than tread water. They -- unlike the Red Sox -- needed Teixeira just to tread water. The race is far from over. In fact, it's just getting interesting.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
As in A-Rod saga, Henry's woe-is-me rings hollow
Here's what Red Sox owner John Henry had to say last night after the Yankees signed Mark Teixeira, a player the Red Sox reportedly had coveted for years:
"From the moment we arrived in Boston in late 2001, we saw (competing with the Yankees) as a monumental challenge. We sought to reduce the financial gap and succeeded to a degree. Now with a new stadium filled with revenue opportunities, they have leaped away from us again. So we have to be even more careful in deploying our resources."
Not so fast, Mr. Henry. The Red Sox offered somewhere in the neighborhood of $170 million. The Yankees won the bidding war with a contract in the neighborhood of $180 million. That works out to about $1.1 million per year over the eight years of the deal.
That's not New Yankee Stadium money. That's Jose Molina money.
It's fun to be the underdog, the team without the overwhelming resources of the Evil Empire. But when you spend $51.1 million to land negotiating rights with Daisuke Matsuzaka, you aren't the underdog anymore. Your cries for sympathy ring awfully hollow.
The Red Sox lost this one. They thought they were calling Scott Boras' bluff, and it backfired on them. It happens, just like it happened in the Alex Rodriguez negotiations in 2003, when the Red Sox got hung up over what amounted to chump change on a payroll north of $100 million. Sure, that one worked out in the end, but we'd look at the deal very differently had Dave Roberts been thrown out at second base.
The Red Sox had a shot then to get Rodriguez and didn't do it -- not because the Yankees have such overwhelming resources, but because they were trying to save $4 million a season.
What's $4 million? It's less than half of what they'll pay Julio Lugo to sit on the bench for the next two years. It's a little more than half of what they paid Manny Ramirez to play for the Dodgers in August, September and October.
The Red Sox had a shot to get Teixeira this week and didn't do it -- not because the Yankees have a new stadium, but because they held a line with Scott Boras to save $10 million.
What's $10 million? It's a fraction of what they paid just to sit down at a table with Dice-K.
“There is really no other fair way to deal with a team that has gone so insanely far beyond the resources of all the other teams,” Henry said after Rodriguez landed in New York.
Fired back George Steinbrenner, “Unlike the Yankees, he chose not to go the extra distance for his fans in Boston. It is understandable but wrong that he would try to deflect the accountability for his mistakes on to others and to a system for which he voted in favor."
The Yankees are and always will be the Yankees. The Red Sox, though, aren't exactly the Pittsburgh Pirates. Steinbrenner was right then and would be right if he said the same thing again today. Henry can't have it both ways.
"From the moment we arrived in Boston in late 2001, we saw (competing with the Yankees) as a monumental challenge. We sought to reduce the financial gap and succeeded to a degree. Now with a new stadium filled with revenue opportunities, they have leaped away from us again. So we have to be even more careful in deploying our resources."
Not so fast, Mr. Henry. The Red Sox offered somewhere in the neighborhood of $170 million. The Yankees won the bidding war with a contract in the neighborhood of $180 million. That works out to about $1.1 million per year over the eight years of the deal.
That's not New Yankee Stadium money. That's Jose Molina money.
It's fun to be the underdog, the team without the overwhelming resources of the Evil Empire. But when you spend $51.1 million to land negotiating rights with Daisuke Matsuzaka, you aren't the underdog anymore. Your cries for sympathy ring awfully hollow.
The Red Sox lost this one. They thought they were calling Scott Boras' bluff, and it backfired on them. It happens, just like it happened in the Alex Rodriguez negotiations in 2003, when the Red Sox got hung up over what amounted to chump change on a payroll north of $100 million. Sure, that one worked out in the end, but we'd look at the deal very differently had Dave Roberts been thrown out at second base.
The Red Sox had a shot then to get Rodriguez and didn't do it -- not because the Yankees have such overwhelming resources, but because they were trying to save $4 million a season.
What's $4 million? It's less than half of what they'll pay Julio Lugo to sit on the bench for the next two years. It's a little more than half of what they paid Manny Ramirez to play for the Dodgers in August, September and October.
The Red Sox had a shot to get Teixeira this week and didn't do it -- not because the Yankees have a new stadium, but because they held a line with Scott Boras to save $10 million.
What's $10 million? It's a fraction of what they paid just to sit down at a table with Dice-K.
“There is really no other fair way to deal with a team that has gone so insanely far beyond the resources of all the other teams,” Henry said after Rodriguez landed in New York.
Fired back George Steinbrenner, “Unlike the Yankees, he chose not to go the extra distance for his fans in Boston. It is understandable but wrong that he would try to deflect the accountability for his mistakes on to others and to a system for which he voted in favor."
The Yankees are and always will be the Yankees. The Red Sox, though, aren't exactly the Pittsburgh Pirates. Steinbrenner was right then and would be right if he said the same thing again today. Henry can't have it both ways.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Draft picks
Baseball teams never used to care much about draft picks. Free agents were where it was at; if it cost a draft pick or two to sign a pitcher like Kevin Brown or a shortstop like Alex Rodriguez, so be it. Cost of doing business. Whatever.
The pendulum has swung hard the other way, thanks in large part to the Moneyball A's -- as well as the Minnesota Twins and other small-market teams who have built themselves on young talent rather than acquired veterans.
Has it swung too far, though?
Here are a few excerpts from recent Buster Olney columns on ESPN.com, columns surveying the landscape of free agency:
"All but two of the free agents who were offered arbitration turned it down in the hopes of landing multiyear deals elsewhere. But increasingly, it appears that the Jason Variteks and Orlando Cabreras are going to have a difficult time landing deals that match what they might have made in arbitration. "With everything that's going on, and the way the prices are dropping, there's no way I'd give Orlando Cabrera a two-year deal for big money -- not when I have to give up a draft pick," a club official said. "Not a chance." "
"Give the representatives for Francisco Rodriguez some credit, because they jumped at the three-year, $37 million deal at the right time -- partly out of concern that the market for closers was about to plummet for anybody who didn't act right away. Now Brian Fuentes, a Type A free agent, is struggling to find suitable bidders, his market hurt by the fact that any team that signs him will lose draft picks. Wrote here weeks ago that the Rockies had a fleeting hope of eventually re-signing Fuentes for a three-year deal, if his market dragged down his asking price in their range. "
And from a list of teams who might be in the market for Fuentes (in a different column):
"Brewers: He would fit in nicely for them as a closer, but it remains to be seen whether GM Doug Melvin will be willing to spend money on a multiyear deal for a reliever again, and whether the Brewers would be open to losing a draft pick in a year in which they should already get compensation picks for both Ben Sheets and CC Sabathia."
"Braves: Atlanta has had a tough winter getting anyone to take their money. So maybe they change direction and bolster their bullpen with an addition like Fuentes. But again, the sacrifice of the draft pick might be a sticking point."
The rule, as a reminder, is that team that signs a Type A free agent loses its first-round draft pick; the club that loses that free agent also gets a supplemental draft pick. Much of the focus of "Moneyball" was the strategy employed by A's general manager Billy Beane -- he would stockpile veterans about to hit free agency, get what he could out of them, and then cash in on their draft picks when they left. It appears he's doing that again with Matt Holliday.
But the "Moneyball" mantra really was far simpler than that. Beane simply wanted to acquire what was undervalued and discard what was overvalued. On-base guys, college players, pending free agents -- all fell under the umbrella of undervalued, and that's what Beane coveted them.
Draft picks, clearly, no longer are undervalued. And if what Olney writes is indicative of the way major league teams are approaching the offseason, they're almost in danger of becoming overvalued. First-round draft picks are fantastic -- but they don't all yield B.J. Upton or Prince Fielder. They just don't. Most first-round draft picks fail to make even a single All-Star team. Teams find plenty of value in later rounds; Dustin Pedroia was a second-round pick for a Red Sox team, for example, that didn't have its first-round pick that year.
Everything is a trade-off; if you sign Fuentes, you lose your first-round pick. But if you take a look at a couple of recent drafts, you'll see that proven-reliever-for-draft-pick might not be such a bad trade, after all. (We'll use the 2001 and 2002 drafts; they're far enough back that players have had a chance to show what they can do and make an impact at the big-league level.)
2001
Picks 1-5: Four for five. Joe Mauer is the best catcher in baseball; Mark Prior should have been a star if not for Dusty Baker; Gavin Floyd won 17 games for the White Sox this season (not the Phillies, who drafted him); Mark Teixeira is going to make $180 million sooner rather than later. Tampa Bay's Dewon Brazelton was drafted No. 3 overall; his career ERA is 6.38.
Picks 6-10: One for five, barely. Chris Burke hit a big postseason home run for the Houston Astros; he also hit .194 last season for the Arizona Diamondbacks. Three of the others drafted in this range never reached the big leagues and are out of baseball.
Picks 11-20: Three for 10 -- again, barely. Two of those three are journeymen Gabe Gross and Aaron Heilman. Casey Kotchman, drafted No. 13, still has a chance to be a star despite two rough months with the Braves to finish last season. Three of the others in this range have played a combined 14 seasons at Double-A.
Picks 21-30: Four for 10, and that's if we count Rookie of the Year-turned-flameout Bobby Crosby. Much-hyped Yankees prospect John-Ford Griffin, for example, went nowhere; he's had 23 major-league at-bats with the Toronto Blue Jays and spent all of 2008 at Triple-A Las Vegas. Brad Hennessey is a useful pitcher for the Giants; Jeremy Bonderman remains a success story since rebounding from a 19-loss season; Noah Lowry won 14 games for the Giants this season.
Overall: Twelve for 30 -- but eight for 25 once you get outside the top five.
2002
Picks 1-5: One for five. Yikes. B.J. Upton is a star. He might have been the ALCS MVP had the Rays held onto that 7-0 lead in Game 5, a game in which Upton hit a two-run home run in the first inning. The rest of the list? Bryan Bullington, Chris Gruler, Adam Loewen (who still has a chance to make it with the Orioles) and Clint Everts (who hasn't yet made it past Single-A ball in the Nationals' system).
Picks 6-10: Three for five. Better. Zack Grienke is the Royals' ace, Prince Fielder is one of the game's best young sluggers, and Jeff Francis went 17-9 for the Rockies in 2007 before enduring a rough, injury-plagued year this year.
Picks 11-20: Seven for 10. This is where the real haul comes: No. 12 Joe Saunders went 17-7 last season for the Angels; No. 15 Scott Kazmir is an ace, though not for the Mets; No. 17 Cole Hamels was this year's World Series MVP. No. 13 Khalil Greene (Padres) and No. 14 Russ Adams (Blue Jays) are useful if mediocre middle infielders. No. 11 Jeremy Hermida is a serviceable if not sensational corner outfielder. No. 16 Nick Swisher hit 35 home runs three years ago and might start at first base for the Yankees this season. No. 19 James Loney and No. 20 Denard Span look like they're on the verge of breaking out for the Dodgers and Twins, respectively.
Picks 21-30: Either one or four for 10, however you want to break it down. Matt Cain, Jeremy Guthrie and Joe Blanton both look like they'll be adequate but not sensational pitchers for the next few years. (Cain has the most hype surrounding him, but he hasn't quite taken the leap yet.) Jeff Francoeur still hasn't quite figured it out for the Braves. But that's about it.
Overall: We'll go with 15 for 30 -- and that's with a pretty star-studded haul in the middle of the first round.
What do we learn? We learn that your chances of landing an above-average major league player in the first round of those two drafts was a little less than 50-50. Yes, there was some huge names -- Teixeira, Fielder, Kazmir, Hamels. But once you get beyond those, you're looking at players like Bonderman and Burke and Francoeur and Heilman, players who perennially are trade bait for teams looking to land someone with more impact.
Losing a first-round pick hurts. But let's not pretend first-round draft picks are guaranteed like currency. Yes, you'd pass up a reliever like Brian Fuentes to draft Scott Kazmir. But would you give him up to draft Dewon Brazelton?
The pendulum has swung hard the other way, thanks in large part to the Moneyball A's -- as well as the Minnesota Twins and other small-market teams who have built themselves on young talent rather than acquired veterans.
Has it swung too far, though?
Here are a few excerpts from recent Buster Olney columns on ESPN.com, columns surveying the landscape of free agency:
"All but two of the free agents who were offered arbitration turned it down in the hopes of landing multiyear deals elsewhere. But increasingly, it appears that the Jason Variteks and Orlando Cabreras are going to have a difficult time landing deals that match what they might have made in arbitration. "With everything that's going on, and the way the prices are dropping, there's no way I'd give Orlando Cabrera a two-year deal for big money -- not when I have to give up a draft pick," a club official said. "Not a chance." "
"Give the representatives for Francisco Rodriguez some credit, because they jumped at the three-year, $37 million deal at the right time -- partly out of concern that the market for closers was about to plummet for anybody who didn't act right away. Now Brian Fuentes, a Type A free agent, is struggling to find suitable bidders, his market hurt by the fact that any team that signs him will lose draft picks. Wrote here weeks ago that the Rockies had a fleeting hope of eventually re-signing Fuentes for a three-year deal, if his market dragged down his asking price in their range. "
And from a list of teams who might be in the market for Fuentes (in a different column):
"Brewers: He would fit in nicely for them as a closer, but it remains to be seen whether GM Doug Melvin will be willing to spend money on a multiyear deal for a reliever again, and whether the Brewers would be open to losing a draft pick in a year in which they should already get compensation picks for both Ben Sheets and CC Sabathia."
"Braves: Atlanta has had a tough winter getting anyone to take their money. So maybe they change direction and bolster their bullpen with an addition like Fuentes. But again, the sacrifice of the draft pick might be a sticking point."
The rule, as a reminder, is that team that signs a Type A free agent loses its first-round draft pick; the club that loses that free agent also gets a supplemental draft pick. Much of the focus of "Moneyball" was the strategy employed by A's general manager Billy Beane -- he would stockpile veterans about to hit free agency, get what he could out of them, and then cash in on their draft picks when they left. It appears he's doing that again with Matt Holliday.
But the "Moneyball" mantra really was far simpler than that. Beane simply wanted to acquire what was undervalued and discard what was overvalued. On-base guys, college players, pending free agents -- all fell under the umbrella of undervalued, and that's what Beane coveted them.
Draft picks, clearly, no longer are undervalued. And if what Olney writes is indicative of the way major league teams are approaching the offseason, they're almost in danger of becoming overvalued. First-round draft picks are fantastic -- but they don't all yield B.J. Upton or Prince Fielder. They just don't. Most first-round draft picks fail to make even a single All-Star team. Teams find plenty of value in later rounds; Dustin Pedroia was a second-round pick for a Red Sox team, for example, that didn't have its first-round pick that year.
Everything is a trade-off; if you sign Fuentes, you lose your first-round pick. But if you take a look at a couple of recent drafts, you'll see that proven-reliever-for-draft-pick might not be such a bad trade, after all. (We'll use the 2001 and 2002 drafts; they're far enough back that players have had a chance to show what they can do and make an impact at the big-league level.)
2001
Picks 1-5: Four for five. Joe Mauer is the best catcher in baseball; Mark Prior should have been a star if not for Dusty Baker; Gavin Floyd won 17 games for the White Sox this season (not the Phillies, who drafted him); Mark Teixeira is going to make $180 million sooner rather than later. Tampa Bay's Dewon Brazelton was drafted No. 3 overall; his career ERA is 6.38.
Picks 6-10: One for five, barely. Chris Burke hit a big postseason home run for the Houston Astros; he also hit .194 last season for the Arizona Diamondbacks. Three of the others drafted in this range never reached the big leagues and are out of baseball.
Picks 11-20: Three for 10 -- again, barely. Two of those three are journeymen Gabe Gross and Aaron Heilman. Casey Kotchman, drafted No. 13, still has a chance to be a star despite two rough months with the Braves to finish last season. Three of the others in this range have played a combined 14 seasons at Double-A.
Picks 21-30: Four for 10, and that's if we count Rookie of the Year-turned-flameout Bobby Crosby. Much-hyped Yankees prospect John-Ford Griffin, for example, went nowhere; he's had 23 major-league at-bats with the Toronto Blue Jays and spent all of 2008 at Triple-A Las Vegas. Brad Hennessey is a useful pitcher for the Giants; Jeremy Bonderman remains a success story since rebounding from a 19-loss season; Noah Lowry won 14 games for the Giants this season.
Overall: Twelve for 30 -- but eight for 25 once you get outside the top five.
2002
Picks 1-5: One for five. Yikes. B.J. Upton is a star. He might have been the ALCS MVP had the Rays held onto that 7-0 lead in Game 5, a game in which Upton hit a two-run home run in the first inning. The rest of the list? Bryan Bullington, Chris Gruler, Adam Loewen (who still has a chance to make it with the Orioles) and Clint Everts (who hasn't yet made it past Single-A ball in the Nationals' system).
Picks 6-10: Three for five. Better. Zack Grienke is the Royals' ace, Prince Fielder is one of the game's best young sluggers, and Jeff Francis went 17-9 for the Rockies in 2007 before enduring a rough, injury-plagued year this year.
Picks 11-20: Seven for 10. This is where the real haul comes: No. 12 Joe Saunders went 17-7 last season for the Angels; No. 15 Scott Kazmir is an ace, though not for the Mets; No. 17 Cole Hamels was this year's World Series MVP. No. 13 Khalil Greene (Padres) and No. 14 Russ Adams (Blue Jays) are useful if mediocre middle infielders. No. 11 Jeremy Hermida is a serviceable if not sensational corner outfielder. No. 16 Nick Swisher hit 35 home runs three years ago and might start at first base for the Yankees this season. No. 19 James Loney and No. 20 Denard Span look like they're on the verge of breaking out for the Dodgers and Twins, respectively.
Picks 21-30: Either one or four for 10, however you want to break it down. Matt Cain, Jeremy Guthrie and Joe Blanton both look like they'll be adequate but not sensational pitchers for the next few years. (Cain has the most hype surrounding him, but he hasn't quite taken the leap yet.) Jeff Francoeur still hasn't quite figured it out for the Braves. But that's about it.
Overall: We'll go with 15 for 30 -- and that's with a pretty star-studded haul in the middle of the first round.
What do we learn? We learn that your chances of landing an above-average major league player in the first round of those two drafts was a little less than 50-50. Yes, there was some huge names -- Teixeira, Fielder, Kazmir, Hamels. But once you get beyond those, you're looking at players like Bonderman and Burke and Francoeur and Heilman, players who perennially are trade bait for teams looking to land someone with more impact.
Losing a first-round pick hurts. But let's not pretend first-round draft picks are guaranteed like currency. Yes, you'd pass up a reliever like Brian Fuentes to draft Scott Kazmir. But would you give him up to draft Dewon Brazelton?
Sunday, December 21, 2008
Jets lose! Jets lose!
The New York Jets opened the door for the Patriots today with their loss at Seattle. Here's how things now look in the AFC East:
1. Miami, 10-5
2. New England, 10-5
3. New York Jets, 9-6
4. Buffalo, 6-8
If the Dolphins win next Sunday against the Jets, both teams would be 9-3 in common games; the Dolphins would have an 8-4 record in AFC games to the Patriots' record of 7-5 and thus win the division title.
The Patriots, then still need some help. But there are ways to get that help. Among them:
* From Jacksonville. If the Jaguars beat the Ravens and the Patriots beat the Bills, the Patriots could qualify as the wild card. That's something of a tall order as the Jaguars have won just once since Nov. 9; they're 1-5 since then.
* From the Jets. If the Jets win or tie against the Dolphins and the Patriots beat the Bills, the Patriots would win the AFC East for the sixth straight season. That might be a tall order, too, given that the Jets have lost three of four and would have lost four of four if not for J.P. Losman's inexplicable fumble a week ago.
There's still a chance. The Patriots absolutely have to win in Buffalo on Sunday, but there still are plausible scenarios that would get them into the playoffs.
"Whatever else happens, happens," Bill Belichick said. "There’s nothing we can do about that. We just have to do what we can do, which was win today and go out there and play well against Buffalo next week."
1. Miami, 10-5
2. New England, 10-5
3. New York Jets, 9-6
4. Buffalo, 6-8
If the Dolphins win next Sunday against the Jets, both teams would be 9-3 in common games; the Dolphins would have an 8-4 record in AFC games to the Patriots' record of 7-5 and thus win the division title.
The Patriots, then still need some help. But there are ways to get that help. Among them:
* From Jacksonville. If the Jaguars beat the Ravens and the Patriots beat the Bills, the Patriots could qualify as the wild card. That's something of a tall order as the Jaguars have won just once since Nov. 9; they're 1-5 since then.
* From the Jets. If the Jets win or tie against the Dolphins and the Patriots beat the Bills, the Patriots would win the AFC East for the sixth straight season. That might be a tall order, too, given that the Jets have lost three of four and would have lost four of four if not for J.P. Losman's inexplicable fumble a week ago.
There's still a chance. The Patriots absolutely have to win in Buffalo on Sunday, but there still are plausible scenarios that would get them into the playoffs.
"Whatever else happens, happens," Bill Belichick said. "There’s nothing we can do about that. We just have to do what we can do, which was win today and go out there and play well against Buffalo next week."
What the Hoch was going on?
Offensive lineman. Fullback. Master of secrecy.
You need it? Russ Hochstein can do it. He'll block on the line of scrimmage; he'll block out of the backfield in front of Sammy Morris or LaMont Jordan. And if someone -- say, a reporter from your local daily newspaper out of Manchester -- wants to know about how long he's been practicing at fullback, he'll keep his team's secrets under wraps.
"I can't give away strategic details like that," Hochstein said with a straight face. "I'll just say that we work on it."
With the way things went on Sunday against Arizona, it's clear they've been working on it quite a bit. Hochstein lined up at tight end or fullback -- checking in as an eligible receiver -- on more than a few occasions and had a huge role in the Patriots' 183 rushing yards in Sunday's 47-7 rout.
"We wouldn't have had half as many yards if Russ wasn't back there," guard Logan Mankins said -- though Hochstein was sitting right next to him, so maybe he had to say that.
Hochstein said he's not going to catch any passes anytime soon; he said he'd have to hit the JUGS machine and show he can catch the ball in practice before they throw it to him in a game. But the chance to hit a defensive player on the move rather than right out of his defensive stance is reward enough.
"When you're 300 pounds, trying to get running and moving, it's always a better thing for a fat guy," he said.
(He's not just a fat guy, though; when Mankins was asked why Hochstein got to play fullback and the rest of the offensive line didn't get that chance, Hochstein chimed in, "Because I'm so athletic.")
True to the company line -- and his new Master of Mystery persona -- Hochstein professed ignorance when asked why he lined up in the backfield so often on Sunday. It might have been the weather; it might have been the matchup. Who knows?
"We had it in our mind, but that's something you'd have to ask the coaches, whether it's weather-related or the Arizona Cardinals or what it was," he said. "But they asked me to do it and we prepared, and we went out and did it."
You need it? Russ Hochstein can do it. He'll block on the line of scrimmage; he'll block out of the backfield in front of Sammy Morris or LaMont Jordan. And if someone -- say, a reporter from your local daily newspaper out of Manchester -- wants to know about how long he's been practicing at fullback, he'll keep his team's secrets under wraps.
"I can't give away strategic details like that," Hochstein said with a straight face. "I'll just say that we work on it."
With the way things went on Sunday against Arizona, it's clear they've been working on it quite a bit. Hochstein lined up at tight end or fullback -- checking in as an eligible receiver -- on more than a few occasions and had a huge role in the Patriots' 183 rushing yards in Sunday's 47-7 rout.
"We wouldn't have had half as many yards if Russ wasn't back there," guard Logan Mankins said -- though Hochstein was sitting right next to him, so maybe he had to say that.
Hochstein said he's not going to catch any passes anytime soon; he said he'd have to hit the JUGS machine and show he can catch the ball in practice before they throw it to him in a game. But the chance to hit a defensive player on the move rather than right out of his defensive stance is reward enough.
"When you're 300 pounds, trying to get running and moving, it's always a better thing for a fat guy," he said.
(He's not just a fat guy, though; when Mankins was asked why Hochstein got to play fullback and the rest of the offensive line didn't get that chance, Hochstein chimed in, "Because I'm so athletic.")
True to the company line -- and his new Master of Mystery persona -- Hochstein professed ignorance when asked why he lined up in the backfield so often on Sunday. It might have been the weather; it might have been the matchup. Who knows?
"We had it in our mind, but that's something you'd have to ask the coaches, whether it's weather-related or the Arizona Cardinals or what it was," he said. "But they asked me to do it and we prepared, and we went out and did it."
There'snow angels allowed
OK, so here's the rule that applies to Wes Welker's snow angel in the first half: A player cannot go to the ground to celebrate a touchdown unless he is praying.
Here's my question: You can go to the ground to pray, but not to make an angel?
Here's my question: You can go to the ground to pray, but not to make an angel?
Loyalty
The trivia question posed after the first quarter at Gillette Stadium today asked fans to name the Patriots' all-time leading scorer. The answer was Adam Vinatieri. When the answer was revealed on the video boards, a healthy contingent of fans lustily booed. (Side note: When else do we use the word "lustily" besides when describing booing? Is it one of those words like "impeccably," which only really refers to the way someone is dressed?)
Sure, maybe they were booing just to keep warm. But there are plenty of ways to keep warm on a day like this -- throwing snowballs at the field has been one popular way of keeping warm so far, as well as a popular way of celebrating special occasions like touchdowns, first downs or rushes for no gain. I'm still waiting for a snowball to hit one of the Minutemen behind the end zones and for that particular Minuteman to turn his musket on the crowd.
It brings up an idea discussed in today's Sox Beat column, an idea many have discussed during the Red Sox's drawn-out pursuit of slugging first baseman Mark Teixeira -- loyalty.
Namely, do the Red Sox owe any loyalty to players like Kevin Youkilis or Mike Lowell, players who carried them to a World Series title barely a year ago? Are sports just a business in which players are disposable parts like uniforms or ticket stubs? And if teams do show loyalty, can that pay off for them in future negotiations?
Vinatieri was, and remains, one of the most important players in the history of the New England Patriots. There's no disputing that fact. His three most dramatic kicks -- his Snow Bowl kick to beat Oakland and his Super Bowl-winning kicks to beat St. Louis and Carolina -- will never fade away from franchise lore.
Since he signed with the rival Indianapolis Colts, though, he's apparently persona non grata with the fans at Gillette Stadium. He left as a free agent; he was disloyal to the team with which he'd spend his entire career. The end result -- he's booed even when he's not in the stadium, when just his name appears on the Jumbotron.
That's fine. If you believe in sentiment, if you think Vinatieri should have turned down more money to stay with the team that drafted him, that's fine. A pretty good group of Patriots fans seemed to believe that. But that same fan base now seems awfully eager to get rid of Mike Lowell to make room for Mark Teixeira; they suddenly throw sentiment to the wind now that there's a chance to get a $200 million first baseman who might be one of the complete hitters in the major leagues.
Vinatieri did what was best for him; his $12 million contract (with a $3.5 million signing bonus) set up his family for a couple of generations. By signing the in-his-prime Teixeira and trading the aging Lowell, the Red Sox would be doing what's best for them, too. There's no question it would make them a better team.
You either believe in loyalty, or you don't. You either expect your team and your players to treat sports like a business, or you don't. You can't have it both ways.
Sure, maybe they were booing just to keep warm. But there are plenty of ways to keep warm on a day like this -- throwing snowballs at the field has been one popular way of keeping warm so far, as well as a popular way of celebrating special occasions like touchdowns, first downs or rushes for no gain. I'm still waiting for a snowball to hit one of the Minutemen behind the end zones and for that particular Minuteman to turn his musket on the crowd.
It brings up an idea discussed in today's Sox Beat column, an idea many have discussed during the Red Sox's drawn-out pursuit of slugging first baseman Mark Teixeira -- loyalty.
Namely, do the Red Sox owe any loyalty to players like Kevin Youkilis or Mike Lowell, players who carried them to a World Series title barely a year ago? Are sports just a business in which players are disposable parts like uniforms or ticket stubs? And if teams do show loyalty, can that pay off for them in future negotiations?
Vinatieri was, and remains, one of the most important players in the history of the New England Patriots. There's no disputing that fact. His three most dramatic kicks -- his Snow Bowl kick to beat Oakland and his Super Bowl-winning kicks to beat St. Louis and Carolina -- will never fade away from franchise lore.
Since he signed with the rival Indianapolis Colts, though, he's apparently persona non grata with the fans at Gillette Stadium. He left as a free agent; he was disloyal to the team with which he'd spend his entire career. The end result -- he's booed even when he's not in the stadium, when just his name appears on the Jumbotron.
That's fine. If you believe in sentiment, if you think Vinatieri should have turned down more money to stay with the team that drafted him, that's fine. A pretty good group of Patriots fans seemed to believe that. But that same fan base now seems awfully eager to get rid of Mike Lowell to make room for Mark Teixeira; they suddenly throw sentiment to the wind now that there's a chance to get a $200 million first baseman who might be one of the complete hitters in the major leagues.
Vinatieri did what was best for him; his $12 million contract (with a $3.5 million signing bonus) set up his family for a couple of generations. By signing the in-his-prime Teixeira and trading the aging Lowell, the Red Sox would be doing what's best for them, too. There's no question it would make them a better team.
You either believe in loyalty, or you don't. You either expect your team and your players to treat sports like a business, or you don't. You can't have it both ways.
It's a beautiful day for football
As much as we media members will try to force the snow storyline down your throats today, don't be fooled -- the conditions aren't that terrible. It's football, and it's a beautiful day for football.
Yes, it's cold and it's snowing. But the field actually looks great right now; it was tarp-covered until two hours before the game, and it was freshly plowed about half an hour before the game. Snow gradually is covering it again, but at this point, it looks really good. Winds also are only about 10 miles per hour, which isn't enough to affect all that much.
The ground still will be slick; wide receivers on both sides will have trouble getting too quick of a release off the line of scrimmage, and it'll be tough to hold onto the ball. But both teams have plenty more to deal with than just the elements.
Yes, it's cold and it's snowing. But the field actually looks great right now; it was tarp-covered until two hours before the game, and it was freshly plowed about half an hour before the game. Snow gradually is covering it again, but at this point, it looks really good. Winds also are only about 10 miles per hour, which isn't enough to affect all that much.
The ground still will be slick; wide receivers on both sides will have trouble getting too quick of a release off the line of scrimmage, and it'll be tough to hold onto the ball. But both teams have plenty more to deal with than just the elements.
Cowboys can't help Patriots
OK, so here's where things stand after the Ravens' somewhat surprising win over Dallas on Saturday night:
* The Ravens get into the playoffs with a win over Jacksonville in Week 17. If they lose (or tie) that game, it'll be about as bad of a Week 17 choke as we've seen in a while; the Jaguars have completely collapsed down the stretch.
* The Patriots, then, would only be able to get into the playoffs as the AFC East champion. For them to do that, they need the Jets and Dolphins each to lose at least once. The most plausible scenario would be for the Jets to lose at Seattle on Sunday and then to beat the Dolphins at home in Week 17, but any scenario in which neither team goes 2-0 down the stretch would work.
That's pretty much it. The Cowboys could have cleared a smooth road for the Patriots with a win on Saturday night, but it didn't happen. All of New England suddenly will have to be rooting for the Seahawks and Chiefs on Sunday -- one of them needs to pull an upset for the Patriots to have any realistic hope of making the playoffs.
* The Ravens get into the playoffs with a win over Jacksonville in Week 17. If they lose (or tie) that game, it'll be about as bad of a Week 17 choke as we've seen in a while; the Jaguars have completely collapsed down the stretch.
* The Patriots, then, would only be able to get into the playoffs as the AFC East champion. For them to do that, they need the Jets and Dolphins each to lose at least once. The most plausible scenario would be for the Jets to lose at Seattle on Sunday and then to beat the Dolphins at home in Week 17, but any scenario in which neither team goes 2-0 down the stretch would work.
That's pretty much it. The Cowboys could have cleared a smooth road for the Patriots with a win on Saturday night, but it didn't happen. All of New England suddenly will have to be rooting for the Seahawks and Chiefs on Sunday -- one of them needs to pull an upset for the Patriots to have any realistic hope of making the playoffs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
