Frayed Knot

"Id bet donuts to dollars that if Cano was ruled safe at 1st, there would have been not even a hint of argument from the Angels bench." There damn well SHOULD have been and Scoscia hardly seems like the type who would sit back and let something like that slide. "So the ump ended up making a big play there, not the players." I disagree. It's the umps job to jump in there if a player not following the rules (Cano) affects the play (which he clearly did IMO). Again, the idea that umps/refs shouldn't 'decide a game' with a call leads to them possibly deciding games with NON-calls which is at least as bad. Anyway, on to new games; Angels FINALLY get a call to go their way here in game 6. Adam Kennedy on 1st when Figgins (finally a hit!!) laces a hit-n-run double to RF. A fan (presumably a local LAA fan) reaches over the low wall to snag the bouncing ball which clearly would have stayed in play (I hope stadium security is currently in their 20th minute of beating him under the stands). The umps initially ruled Kennedy to stop at 3rd, until a brief protest from Scoscia and an ump confab led to them awarding him home (he was running on the pitch remember). He likely would have scored anyway as the Halos actually put a few hits together and took a 3-2 lead here as they attempt to stave off elimination.

"Players should be paid fairly and what they are worth. They are overpaid." They're being paid only what they're being offered by competing employers in an open market -- and even then it takes them a long while before they're allowed to exercise that right. "Owners should make money. They have to adjust prices to do it." And control expenses as well. The old reliable "invisible hand" of supply and demand take care of the prices. "Its out of control and the players will never concede anything, which, to me, is a problem." They made some concessions in the last negotiating session. "Of course, there was a time when the owners would not concede, but we are far past that point." And while the system is far from perfect, I don't think it's "broken" (see stats in above post). The parties are making (slow) progress and I believe that what's in place now puts the league as a whole in as good a place as it's been in many years.

I'm not sold on the idea that salary caps are a magic elixer in these things. In the words of Rod Serling; "Submitted for your approval": Over the Last 10 years: Champions: MLB = 6 different teams (20% of the league) NFL = 7 (21.9%) NBA = 5 (17.2%) Reaching the Finals: MLB = 11 different teams (36.7%) NFL = 11 (34.4%) NBA = 12 (41.4%) Failed to reach the league semis (league/conference championship): MLB = 12 different teams (40%) NFL = 10 (31.3%) NBA = 10 (34.5%) And over the last 20 years: Different Champions: MLB = 14 (46.7%) NFL = 11 (34.4%) NBA = 6 (20.7%) - that's right, only 6 franchises over 20 seasons! Reached the finals: MLB = 19 (63.3%) NFL = 19 (59.4%) NBA = 15 (51.7%) Did not reach the semis: MLB = 5 (16.7%) NFL = 4 (12.5%) NBA = 6 (20.7%)

I think everyone's point is that, because there's no photo or specific image that an artist would be more or less obligated to copy (Iwo Jima), why put them in such hokey looking poses? It's not like we know what their REAL stance was and now it's being altered - a la making the NYC firemen of differing ethnicities, or the cigarette-less FDR - for some political correctnes issue. No one seems to be arguing against the idea here, just the (potential) execution.

Angels continue to run the bases poorly. This time it was Erstad who - down by 4 runs at mid-game - decides to try for a 2-out triple and was thrown out by about 8 feet. For all the talk of small-ball* going on with these teams, the Angels and ChiSox have gotten to where they are DESPITE the way they're executing little ball, not because of it. * -- and while we're on this subject, I'm getting a huge kick out of listening to MFY fans who think the reason they didn't go further is because they don't bunt enough. If I'm on the opposing side I'm BEGGING for Sheff, ARod & Giambi to start laying them down.

Here's where I'd like to kick off the discussion; I think it's pretty clear that Wright & Floyd were the best offensive players. The question is; in which order? Wright led Cliff in runs scored: 99 to 85; RBI: 102 - 98; 2Bs: 42 - 22; BBs: 72 - 63 BA: .306 - ..273; OBA: .388 - .358; SLG: .523 - .505 Floyd his more HRs: 34 - 27, struck out less: 98 - 113; stole better: 12 of 14 vs 17 of 24; and GiDP'd less: 5 vs [u:9bgu2fku]16[/u:9bgu2fku] ! So why does my gut say that Floyd had the better season? Well, for starters, it seems to me - and I'm always leery of baseball phrases that start "it seems to me" - that Cliff just got the bigger hits all year long, that he played better defense, that the lineup depended on him more, etc. So go ahead, someone make an argument that backs me up on Floyd deseving the top spot (at least among non-pitchers) or, conversely, tell me why I'm all wet.

How is this done each year? Pretty much anyway you want. You can jump in either by creating your own list for critque or by plunging into an ongoing discussion of someone else's. How you go about concocting your list - blending the pitchers with the hitters, or rating good part-timers vs mediocre full-timers, etc. - is your choice. You can do it entirely by gut or you can sabremetric the thing to within an inch of it's life. Just be prepared to defend your conclusions if - or let's face it ... WHEN - peeps here question your logic, your intelligence, and quite possibly your family lineage. There are really only a few rules & guidelines: - 30 players only, ranked from 30 points to the top guy and 1 to the bottom guy. We used 42 different players this year which means the 12 true bottom feeders will be off the list entirely. - We're looking to rank for real results only and this year only. In other words, don't go demoting guys because they have "Yankee/Brave cooties" on them, or because they annoyed you by smirking after giving up a run or something. This should be based on perfromance not likability. By the same token we're not looking to rank players "on the curve"; so if Player A had a better season than Player B then rank them that way as opposed to putting B higher simply because his salary or expectations were lower, or by anticipating what he "might have done" had he been brought up sooner and the stupid-ass manager given him more starts, better lineup slots, etc., or how his future looks for 2006 and beyond. This is strictly a 2005 season report card. Eventually, we reach some kind of consensus. The 42 players in 2005, ranked by use: Hitters by AB: Reyes -- Beltran -- Wright -- Floyd -- Piazza Cairo -- Cameron -- Diaz -- Mientkiewicz -- Matsui Anderson -- Castro -- Woodward -- Jacobs -- Offerman Valent -- Williams -- Daubach -- A. Hernandez -- DiFelice Pitchers by IP: Martinez -- Glavine -- Benson -- Zambrano -- Heilman Ishii - Seo -- R. Hernandez -- Looper -- Bell Trachsel -- Padilla -- DeJean -- Aybar -- Koo Graves -- Ring -- Takatsu -- Mathews Heredia -- Hamulack

The argument for a more lax style of ump/ref-ing in crucial situations has always been that they should "let them play" and "not decide the game with a call". But hell, you do that and instead of deciding the game with a call you're helping to decide the game with a NON call -- which is even worse since it benefits the team that was skirting the rules.

Well of course the rule is that you're supposed to run entirely in "the lane"; iow, with both feet on the foul side of the line. So even if Cano's foot was touching the line every now and then he's still technically wrong. That both feet spent several strides on the fair side of the line is what made the call so obvious to me (and apparently to Joe West). The idea that the throw wasn't good anyway shouldn't enter into it - especially keeping in mind that the reason for the rule is so that the runner won't affect the throw and/or block the 1st baseman's view. And I'm certainly not buying the argument (put forth from several sources) that the 'importance of this game' means you somehow get more lax on a call like this. MFY fans have this tendancy to think that games affecting their possible ouster from the playoffs are somehow more parmount than those played by mere mortals. If I were going to cry about a call I'd go to the one where Cano jumped off the base a partial second too soon on the force play. That there was no advantage to be gained there (he wasn't leaving early so as to turn a DP) and he was only trying to clear the base for the oncoming runner seems much better justification for letting the letter of the law slide. It's surprising to me that more people seem to have complaints about the play at 1st than about the one at 2nd.

Centerfield wrote: Holy crap. Never knew that. Thanks FK. That's because the MFYs like to pretend that their history didn't begin until 1921.

The Cano call was absolutely correct and I'm surprised at how much talk there's been about this -- even from non-NYY fans. He was running with his right foot on the fair side of the baseline the entire way down the line (at least 3 full strides worth). I mean if he was at least straddling the line a bit maybe he'd get away with it but that call was a no-brainer IMO. The throw doesn't need to hit him to affect the play.

Eddings' hand signals may have been confusing but; a) that's the way he had called 'strike 3' the entire time and the Angels seem to be using that more as an after-the-fact excuse than anything else. The catcher Paul couldn't have been confused by it because he never saw it. Bad call? Probably, but they're not removing or "censuring" an ump for that.

The other thing that 'generally happens' is that the catcher looks to the ump after anything even remotely close just to get confirmation of the fact that he caught the ball cleanly. Paul never did and - as confusing as the strike/punch-out signals may have been - neither he not any of the other Angels appeared to be fooled by that because they were already trotting off the field while Eddings was going through his mechanics. In short they never looked they just assumed, and when you assume ... Piersynski, on the other hand, assumed that it was NOT clean and when he didn't get the expected tag on his butt he simply took off. Run first, ask questions later. I still think it was a bad (though close) call - and it's certainly a sucky way to lose - but the Halos are as much to blame as anyone. Piersynski made sure and they didn't.

I doubt the Braves are ready to turn over catching to McCann full time (he isn't even their best minor league catching prospect - they like the guy a year or so behind him even better). So I suspect they'll go with a combo of McCann and Estrada next year (Eddie Perez is getting a bit old). As far as I know they expect Estrada to fully recover from his injuries by spring - he was never really right after Darrin Erstad steamrolled him at the plate around mid-season.

Letterman: I'm grateful to Alex Rodriguez because now I am no longer the most overpaid disappointment in New York

Umps w/supervisor in live press conference on ESPN - Home ump (Doug Eddings) says that the "out" call was not an indication that he thought the ball was caught but merely his normal strike 3 mechanics. - Ump supervisor: Replays "inconclusive at best" - Piersynski's delay in running toward 1st is NOT the same as being out ... at least until he reaches the dugout (he never made more than a step towards his bench)

They've done this for several years now on those days - there are usually only 1 or 2 - when both teams play on the same day. I guess FOX feel$$$ it's better having two games go against each other than having one of them played during the day. KC, F/X is on channel 40 on my Cablevision system

Oh WOW does that SUCK!!!! For those who didn't see it: - 1-1 tie / bottom 9 / 2 outs / none on / AJ Piersynski batting for the Sox - he apparently strikes out swinging on something near the dirt - Angel catcher Josh Paul (the Molinas had been pr'd for) rolls the ball back to the mound and thinks it's all headed for the 10th - But Peirsynski thinks it maybe hit the dirt and heads towards 1st, making it easily because all the Angels are walking off the field - After long discussions, mucho arguing from Scoscia, and a belated consultation with the 3rd base ump, Piersynski is awarded 1st - Pablo Ozuna pinch runs and promptly steals 2nd - Joe Crede lines a 2-strike pitch into the LF corner and the Sox win!!!! The main bone of contention is going to be that the home ump seemed to not only indicate the strike 3 but also a "punch-out" sign and may have been convinced into thinking the pitch was NOT caught cleanly only by the fact that Piersynski's ran. By the time the 3rd base ump was asked he either agreed that it hit the dirt, didn't see it well enough to over-rule it, or was too chicken to make a member of his crew look bad. I was pulling for the Sox and didn't want to see it end like that once AJ got on. This thing's going to be talked about for days inside MLB.

="Yancy Street Gang"] By my definition, these are the original teams: National League Chicago Cubs Cincinnati Reds Philadelphia Phillies Pittsburgh Pirates St. Louis Cardinals American League Boston Red Sox Chicago White Sox Cleveland Indians Detroit Tigers New York Yankees Yanx moved from Baltimore in 1904, ergo not original. Friggin' newbies!

A couple of thoughts on one of the potential FA catchers currently filling the thoughts of some Met fans' - and possibly front office - heads. From an article on Hardball Times entitled; 'Five Untrue Things You'll Learn About the Angels This Week' http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/five-untrue-things-youll-learn-about-the-angels-this-week/ Bengie Molina is a great defensive catcher I'm not sure Bengie's even a good defensive catcher at this point. His throwing has deteriorated -- from 36 of 81 base-stealers (44%) in 2003, to 18/69 (26%) in 2004, to 20/64 (31%) this year; even while his barely younger brother has been improving from 28% to 49% to 53%. And more noticeable on a day-to-day basis is Bengie's increasingly desperate habit of jabbing with his glove at pitches in the dirt, instead of trying to move his fat body in the way. He led MLB with 10 passed balls this year to Jose Molina's three, but that doesn't begin to tell the story, since official scorers rarely even call passed balls anymore. The real action is in wild pitches: John Lackey -- he of just 71 BB in 209 innings pitched -- ranked third in all of baseball with 18 wild pitches this year; reliever Scot Shields came in seventh with 12 (and K-Rod had eight, and Esteban "I'm Not Even on the Playoff Roster" Yan uncorked five, etc.). This actually ran last week prior to the Yanqui series and it was an attempt to educate those who rarely see the west coast teams about how certain pearls of "conventional wisdom" might not be too wise after all. Having said all that, he's looked OK defensively to me - in a small sample size anyway. But he'll also turn 32 next June with one of those bodies that doesn't strike me as the type that'll "age" particularly well and, as a FA, will likely command a deal for at least 3 years. He also seems to me to be, oh I dunno ... too similar? to Ramon Castro. Same type of hitter (he's a better hitter than Castro but still sort of the same), same body (maybe even the same helmet size) plus, in a foot race with a pregnant woman, the two would stage a death battle for 3rd and 4th place. Castro is 2 years younger. Just thinkin out loud here.

That's also a mostly opinion article. Don't confuse it's conclusions of heros and villians as if a statement of absolute truth.

McCarver actually talked about this briefly tonight. He said Contreras has a fork ball and said the difference is that the fork "is choked more"; ie. jammed further in between the fingers.

]Speculation has Mike Flanagan being bumped to a different job within the org and Jim Beattie being just plain bumped. And speculation was dead on in this case: Flanagan kicked upstairs, Beattie out. Supposedly this also that means Perlozzo's job as field manager is safe. No word on whether (or who) someone gets the GM job to presumably work under Flanagan.

Angels steal game 1 when all the factors seemed to line up against them: road game, unfavorable pitching matchup, travel weary, etc. Hey, a sub-3 hour post-season game!! What's up wit dat?

Went for theBoSox last year, might as well pull for the ChiSox this year. I'm Bi-Soxual!!