CSS Button No Image Css3Menu.com
New! Search comments:
(NOTE: Relevance, Author, and Article are not applicable for comment searches)
For the record, I wasn't disputing Will's ballot, I just thought the situation was funny.
"With all due respect to the other names mentioned above, however, a ballot that includes anyone but those three guys [Lincecum, Carpenter, Wainwright] in the top three is in error." - Joe Sheehan, Monday.
He meant that the make-up was for the blown call on Swisher at second, not the later play. I don't have a problem with makeup calls in the NBA, since each team gets so many possessions that having a phantom foul or turnover call here and there just isn't going to make that much difference.
Each baseball team only gets 27 (regulation) outs. Blowing even one of them can have a HUGE impact, whether it's player or umpiring error, the result is the same.
Hey Will, are we going to get your thoughts on these studies sometime soon?
Sure, I'll buy that they might want to trade him, but there's no way they're getting THREE guys like they got for Hairston. Obviously they can flip him for at least one mediocre prospect, but I think they'd be better off with a straight up challenge trade for another struggling young-ish major-leaguer or try to package him. Trading him straight up for prospects at the (relative) bottom of his value doesn't seem to be the right strategy for success here...at least let him try to start hitting again if you're going to do that.
Exactly what part of Kevin Kouzmanoff's game makes him such a valuable trade commodity? His .299 OBP last year, or his .270 mark this season? Because, you know, 27-year old third basemen that can't even hit .240/.300/.400 with middling defense are in such high demand, right?
"....or depending on their tolerance for controversy, first base."
I mean, I know Hoffpauir isn't exactly hitting the cover off the ball, but his .270 EqA should play decently enough that if they wanted a controversy, they'd have one already.
Or they just just un-trade Lee for the vacuum-dessicated remains of Hee-Sop Choi.
I know I'm coming at this from a selfish angle (since I'm going to the game), but does this mean that the Zambrano-Peavy matchup scheduled for tomorrow at PetCo is likely off, or if Peavy turns the deal down does he still likely make his regular start?
No, but it's been tied, even recently.
This is where the \"Mark Cuban Theory of Internet Service Providers\" runs into a bit of a problem. A company like Comcast puts in the caps to try to curtail file sharing, and it hurts their legitimate customers. It\'s doubly problematic because MLBAM is offering their product on both sides of Comcast\'s business model (streaming internet and cable), which I believe, unlike the NBA, are sold separately. It would be one thing if you could just switch from MLB.tv to MLB EI to save on the bandwidth without spending the extra money, but instead you\'ve got Comcast essentially playing its customers and MLB off of each other. I don\'t think this model is sustainable in the long run (maybe it means that Comcast is able to force MLB to adopt the NBA model, but I doubt it).
Great piece. One question though, when you said:
\"Video took a bit longer, but by the time YouTube was sold in 2006, people were watching almost as much on their computers as on television.\"
are you basing this on any data, or just anecdotal evidence?
I was actually at this game (one of the benefits of having a sister that lives two blocks from PetCo and has a partial season ticket package), and at the time, even being fairly aware of the Reds pitching situation, I wasn\'t that shocked by the decision to bring in Harang in the 12th, once they\'d gotten that far. As you pointed out, the management of the bullpen to that point may have been arguable, especially given the eventual length of the game, but once he got there, picking Harang over Cueto or Volquez wasn\'t that shocking.
What was shocking to me, however, was the decision to not use Cueto AT ALL, instead eventually going to Volquez to lose the game. This looks even worse when you realize that the Reds were off that Monday, flying to Pittsburgh for a series starting Tuesday. Instead of bringing in Harang to relieve on 2 days rest, having Volquez relieve on 1 day rest (he also pitched well in a rain-delayed game that I also was at that Friday night) and the starting Cueto that Tuesday on 6 days rest, he could have brought in Cueto to relieve on 3 days rest, then gone to Volquez at the end saving Harang to start that Tuesday on full rest.
If he\'d had to put a starter out there on Monday, saving Cueto makes a little more sense. With the off day, it makes it quite a bit more questionable.
I also found this statement somewhat questionable, as it doesn\'t seem to address the source of the equalization. Even if it were true that the MLB playoff gives teams a better chance than in other sports A) MLB has a smaller percentage of its teams make the playoffs than the other major sports and B) it doesn\'t distinguish between \"equalization\" due to the playoff system itself and the underlying nature of baseball vs. football, basketball and hockey, which is more or less immutable.
And if the Chargers or Cardinals win the Super Bowl this year, couldn\'t that change the math on this question significantly?