Baseball Thread IV

[Moderator1]

My wife can handle being out for about an hour at a time these days so I took her out for about an hour this afternoon after the Nats game. Was a bit surprised to come home and learn that the Braves needed 11 innings to win a game in which they hit EIGHT home runs.

It's a long line of bad bullpens in Atlanta. Is this the worst?

 

[TigerVols]

My wife can handle being out for about an hour at a time these days so I took her out for about an hour this afternoon after the Nats game. Was a bit surprised to come home and learn that the Braves needed 11 innings to win a game in which they hit EIGHT home runs.

It's a long line of bad bullpens in Atlanta. Is this the worst?

I guess, although having Liebrandt come out of the pen still haunts me.

I think the Braves may very well be close to turning the corner in the BP, just like they've done everywhere else in the lineup. The answer appears to be Ken Ray, who has very good numbers so far...

http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/stats/mlb_individual_stats_player.jsp?playerID=150208

 

[Oz]

The way Jason Bay is hitting, he might Albert Pujols for the league lead for home runs in the next week or so. While it might be an overstatement, he's on pace for his best season, easy.

 

[shotglass]

6-0 Nats in the fourth, my main man Zimmerman with a jack and Soriano just hit No. EIGHTEEN.

12 prospects, at a minimum.    Before long, they'll have to demand someone's entire farm system.

Moddy, I just heard a few days ago that Zimmerman made a once-in-a-decade play about a month ago. He robbed Pete Orr of a soft line single with an unreal grab, diving directly away from the plate in short left field.

The word on Sens' prospects down here is "eh." The 20-year-old SS, Desmond, wasn't ready for this level, got sent back down to Potomac over the weekend. Kory Costo is a solid third baseman, a No. 2-type hitter who, obviously, will either have to learn a new position or be dangled as trade bait. Roy Corcoran has been lights-out as a closer; best part of that pitching staff. And Frank Diaz ... I don't quite know what to make of him. Everybody says he's terrific; I haven't really seen it yet.

Then again, I never remembered Vidro hitting here, and everybody told me he did.

 

[broadway joe]

My wife can handle being out for about an hour at a time these days so I took her out for about an hour this afternoon after the Nats game. Was a bit surprised to come home and learn that the Braves needed 11 innings to win a game in which they hit EIGHT home runs.

It's a long line of bad bullpens in Atlanta. Is this the worst?

I guess, although having Liebrandt come out of the pen still haunts me.

I think the Braves may very well be close to turning the corner in the BP, just like they've done everywhere else in the lineup. The answer appears to be Ken Ray, who has very good numbers so far...

http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/stats/mlb_individual_stats_player.jsp?playerID=150208

Hard to tell if the Braves have turned the corner or if they've just hit a nice soft patch of schedule. They've won 14 of 19, but 11 of those wins have come against Florida, Washington and the Cubbies. I know they're the Braves, but I'm not convinced yet.

 

[Flying Headbutt]

Hey, doing that got the Mets all that early season publicity about how great they are this year.

 

[Bubbler]

Lou, I've been off the computer for awhile so I must saw the question you say demands an answer. I'll  have to go off the top of my head and tell you I was disappointed, though not surprised, when Andre Dawson won '87 MVP so easily. That went against everything I was taught by the veterans of the BBWAA (deck Young, Jack Lang, Leonard Koppett, Frank Dolson, Charlie Feeney, Bus Saidt) about the voting process. There are no hard and fast rules, as you all know, but the important word in the award is value. And everybody told me, the young (at the time) voter, that what a guy did "to help his team contend" was most significant.

Well, as you know, the Cubs never contended that year so for all Dawson's greatness that season, where was his value to team? I polled the Cardinals' clubhouse late that season and, based heavily on Whitey Herzog's suggestion, cast my vote for Ozzie Smith, who, I was told, they couldn't have won without.

People can call me an idiot if they choose, but it was an honest vote for what I felt was the most important part to the award. Dawson was the player of the year but I felt strongly that Ozzie was the MVP.

I will attempt to think of some more but that should give you all plenty of ammunition for now.             

Just curious, but what was the line of thinking when A-Rod won along the same lines with the Rangers in 2003?

 

[Moderator1]

6-0 Nats in the fourth, my main man Zimmerman with a jack and Soriano just hit No. EIGHTEEN.

12 prospects, at a minimum.    Before long, they'll have to demand someone's entire farm system.

Moddy, I just heard a few days ago that Zimmerman made a once-in-a-decade play about a month ago. He robbed Pete Orr of a soft line single with an unreal grab, diving directly away from the plate in short left field.

The word on Sens' prospects down here is "eh." The 20-year-old SS, Desmond, wasn't ready for this level, got sent back down to Potomac over the weekend. Kory Costo is a solid third baseman, a No. 2-type hitter who, obviously, will either have to learn a new position or be dangled as trade bait. Roy Corcoran has been lights-out as a closer; best part of that pitching staff. And Frank Diaz ... I don't quite know what to make of him. Everybody says he's terrific; I haven't really seen it yet.

Then again, I never remembered Vidro hitting here, and everybody told me he did.

Shot, I saw that play along with my son the Braves fan. He dropped his jaw and said "Holy shirt." A terrific play. He made another one the other day against the Astros. Yesterday, with Guillen out and Vidro resting, he batted cleanup and hit the three-run home run.
He's the one guy they definitely won't trade.

 

[Football_Bat]

Speaking of Tigers - happy 48th birthday to Kirk Gibson.

Uh, Kirk's 49. But that means he was only 31 when he hobbled around the bases at Chavez Ravine. That must make him 70 in Kirk years.

 

[Starman]

Speaking of Tigers - happy 48th birthday to Kirk Gibson.

Uh, Kirk's 49. But that means he was only 31 when he hobbled around the bases at Chavez Ravine. That must make him 70 in Kirk years.

"Two Swings." (As in, "the sum total of your career.")

That was the nickname Detroit players had for Gibson around the clubhouse the last couple years, as he did his Col. Blimp/R. Lee Ermey imitation as a Tiger coach.

 

[nafselon]

ESPN has no live baseball on today. Unbelievable, you'd think they would be all over the Yankees-Tigers game.

 

[Gold]

Lou, I've been off the computer for awhile so I must saw the question you say demands an answer. I'll  have to go off the top of my head and tell you I was disappointed, though not surprised, when Andre Dawson won '87 MVP so easily. That went against everything I was taught by the veterans of the BBWAA (deck Young, Jack Lang, Leonard Koppett, Frank Dolson, Charlie Feeney, Bus Saidt) about the voting process. There are no hard and fast rules, as you all know, but the important word in the award is value. And everybody told me, the young (at the time) voter, that what a guy did "to help his team contend" was most significant.

Well, as you know, the Cubs never contended that year so for all Dawson's greatness that season, where was his value to team? I polled the Cardinals' clubhouse late that season and, based heavily on Whitey Herzog's suggestion, cast my vote for Ozzie Smith, who, I was told, they couldn't have won without.

People can call me an idiot if they choose, but it was an honest vote for what I felt was the most important part to the award. Dawson was the player of the year but I felt strongly that Ozzie was the MVP.

I will attempt to think of some more but that should give you all plenty of ammunition for now.             

Casty: generally the MVP theory that what a player did to help his team compete is a good one, but some of those old-time scribes also wouldn't vote for a starting pitcher as MVP. However, sometimes a player has a season that is so much better than any other player in the league that they deserve the MVP. If someone looked at the statistics today and they saw that Ozzie Smith got the MVP over Andre Dawson, they would really question it. You and I know how good a defensive shortstop Ozzie Smith is and that he is underrated on offense, but Dawson had a great season. There is the word valuable in MVP, but the award has also come to mean by implication the top player in the league and you figure this out overall.

I still believe Andre Dawson deserved the MVP in 1987 - it was a good choice.

Here's the problem with the Jack Lang argument - If you extend that argument literally and logically, you couldn't vote for Andre Dawson second, third, or anywhere else on your MVP ballot.

Yeah, I read all of those guys growing up. And yeah, today there are a lot of newspaper cutbacks so some of the coverage isn't as good today. But I think for the serious baseball fan today, having the input of agents and stat people provides a better quality of information and more ability to give a better picture of things than reading deck Young, whom I never met but found outmoded when I read him in the 1970s.

Respectfully disagree with you on this one.