Baseball Thread IV

A's aren't playing possum. They have two starters and three relievers on the DL, plus Milton Bradley. Wnen they're healthy, their the class of the division. Assuming everyone gets back OK, they go on their usual late-season tear and blow everyone away down the stretch.

Rangers won't even finish second. They'll wilt in the heat as usual, especially their pitching.

 

When Theo Epstein walked away from the Red Sox this past winter - I was convinced that he was taking time off and waiting for the Nats ownership issue to be settled.

I think that Kansas City would be perfect for Paul Depodesta's comeback. They are the classic Moneyball situation - why not emulate the A's? Bill James is still a huge Royals fan. Wouldn't it be interesting to give him a shot at the big time? Bill James as GM of the Royals would make the Royals at the very least an interesting situation to follow.

BTW - spell check wants me to change Depodesta to "deposits" - Paul Deposits - I like that. Its like how spell check always wants me to change "Padres" to "faders"

 

I wrote ``unhittable'' in a story yesterday and Microsoft Word changed it to ``knittable.''

 

Jose Lima is a very knittable pitcher

 

It gives them easy ways to write idiotic things, like the solution to the whole season was moving Matt Murton to first or re-signing Garciaparra.

 

They only have one rookie pitcher in the starting lineup.

The lack of left handed hitting is more concerning.

 

You gotta know that Mike Ilitch, one of the great "small market" cut-and-dump artists in MLB over the last 15 years, is just shitting his pants at the prospect of not only being IN the pennant race, but probably leading it, at the All-Star break, so the first time they lose three in a row, he won't be able to shut the season down, trade off the entire relief corps because they might want a bigger contract next year, and dump the rest of the season and "wait for next year," as he's done just about every year since 1991.

 

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

 

He's still an asshole. ;D

 

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 (Dick 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.