A Penny for the Giants Playoff Run??

I guess so!! Who would have thought that on Sept 1st the Giants would be tied for the wild-card spot and a bond-fide contender in the N.L. playoff chase?

And who would have thought that with a rotation of Lincecum, Cain and a rejuvenated Barry Zito and Randy Johnson as a possible lefty specialist out of the pen--plus adding Brad Penny--the Giants have a pitching staff that could actually make some noise if they get there?

And who would have thought that Edgar Renteria and Barry Zito would both decide to make their production at least somewhat match their paychecks?

This could be a surprisingly interesting and intense September for the G-men.

Dodger fan is going to just love Brad Penny when he returns in a Giant uniform. Those reunions are always so sentimental.

I have to say that Barry Zito is starting to pitch like the Barry Zito of old. He has competed all year long. Lately, his curve ball has the look and the bite of the Oakland A's / vintage Barry Zito curve ball. If he has that pitch back, then he can really pitch.

And Eli Whiteside behind the dish is hitting just well enough to keep Sabean to his promise of not bringing Buster Posey up too soon (this season). Posey is still over .300 in AAA so his ascension is a forgone conclusion. With Whiteside around and Sandoval in a pinch, the Giants are loaded enough at catcher to pass on Bengie Molina, unless we start to the Angels vintage Molina down the stretch. Even then, two years and $6 million per may be too rich for the Giants blood.

Little League World Series is flirtin' with disaster, y'all

OK, I promised myself that this year I would not say anything negative about the Little League World Series. But I lied. I love the event, it still represents a slice of Americana, but there are some things I cannot watch much longer without venting.

First, the obligatory messages that you see EVERY broadcast, bar none. This wasn't quite so annoying when there was only ONE broadcast per year, but now that the LLWS looks more like March Madness, these messages have got to be scaled back somewhat.

1) The umpires are volunteers, they pay their own way here.
This message is usually delivered immediately after a retched safe/out call or a ball/strike call that Ray Charles would not miss. I'd pay some of these guys one-way ticket back home. Listen, these guys are supposed to be the creme de la creme of Little League umpires. It's not too much to ask that they appear to know what they are doing. Do your Leslie Nielsen, strikeout looking, punch out dance on the THIRD strike fellas. And this is after repeatedly looking at the indicator to check the count. It's not that hard to keep track in your head guys.

And if the field is 2/3 the size of a major league field, why do we need the same amount of umpires to cover it? Seems like four would be plenty. Most of these guys have probably rarely worked with ONE partner, much less FIVE others. And a one week or two week crash course is not going to get these guys up to speed in time.

2) The major leaguers are watching the LLWS in clubhouses across the country.
This is a bit of a tip of the cap and some needed good PR for ESPN's other corporate partner--Major League Baseball. I doubt too many guys are watching too strenuously when 75% of the time, they are playing at the same time. Oh, exception noted for the Cubs and White Sox, who are mandated by their coaches to watch the games in order to pick up base-running tips to improve their game.

3) The must play rule is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
No, it's not. It gives an advantage to the teams/leagues that carry less players on the roster. Unless they are mandating and enforcing that everyone actually has the same roster size coming into the game, there is an inequity that is being ignored.

4) The pitch count is the second greatest thing since sliced bread.
No, it's not. Unless you are also going to mandate that these kids do not throw curve-ball after curve-ball--ad nauseum--to say nothing of the slop-slider these kids twist off. I can't get through a single game without severe pain and inflammation in my elbow. And I'm just watching these kids throw.

To have the pitch count rule in place without doing anything to address breaking balls--I don't think you've made the world a much safer place for youth pitchers nationwide. And the continually mounting pitching injury statistics bear that out.

5) Which dovetails rather nicely into my next rant. Pitcher safety.
Having pitch counts will not be a salve to the wound that Little League Baseball and youth baseball in general will suffer when one of these pitchers takes a come backer to the face or head on national TV. To say nothing of the damage done if one of these calendar year 13 year-olds delivers a pitch to a late 11-early 12 year old batter.

The CA team's lineup last night went back-to-back with the 6-foot, 170 pound "Little" Leaguer and another good sized kid with a "Major" League swing. If he connected he could easily take out the 3B or pitcher with a rocket line drive.

One of the CA batters, after swinging at a third strike in the dirt that got past the catcher, TOOK OFF FOR FIRST BASE!! Do you know why he might have done that??? My guess is because he plays in a league or a travel team where they are ALLOWED to take off on a dropped third strike by rule. Granted, PONY does that and some 12 year-old travel leagues do, but my guess is that a lot of these 13 year-olds have played on the bigger field before.

We all marveled at Danny Almonte a couple of years ago until we learned that he was too good (too old) to be true. But was he such a phenom that LL or ESPN figured that people enjoyed watching the level of competence a 13-14 year old could provide and tried to increase the numbers by backing up the birth date eligibility to allow for it to happen more frequently?

We used to joke about kids who were big enough to have driven the team bus, but some of these kids look like they could actually LIFT the team bus.

It's all fun and games until someone gets hurt guys.

There is a lot of chatter about birth dates and it's effect on advancement and development throughout the major sports as well as other important elements of kids lives, such as education. And while the data is difficult to dismiss outright, I think a larger factor I see at work in these games is what Dr. Mike Marshall used to refer to as the LLWS being a Tournament of Accelerated Maturers.

If I remember right, we vacated a world championship won by the Philippines some years back after it was discovered that the team was stacked with 15-16 year-old kids. While that team was advanced physically, they were not that much bigger than a "normal" 12 year-old. And granted, there is a great range of size at this level, but the 14-15 year-olds would have more repetitions and greater overall skill development which that would deliver. It's a game of repetition and as a former colleague used to tell me "Charlie, you cannot teach BIG."

I hope these guys don't have such a party on the ratings bonanza (read money) that has accrued to both LL and ESPN from this expansion. Expanding the number of teams that play to promote the game is one thing, but expanding the talent pool to shoehorn borderline HS players into a kiddie pool is not pretty. To say nothing about how it endangers the safety of the players on the "short" end of the gene pool.

And I hope some poor kid never sacrifices his health and safety before the adults realize they have pushed the envelope too far.

P.S. - One more suggestion guys. The teams from "Saudi Arabia" and "Germany" that are in reality U.S. military base teams probably do nothing to promote the game internationally. The Middle East team should truly represent the Middle East, not the U.S. Same with the European representative.

If Little League isn't big enough in these countries that they are not able to field a team capable of getting out of their local pool maybe they should be handicapped as in golf and bowling and allowed to pull players from a wider radius than in the U.S. Maybe base it on population density or something and adjust it annually until these guys catch up.

And if you miss one year on the formula and one of these teams actually wins the title one year, so what. I MEAN, SO WHAT!!! Wouldn't that do more to promote the sport internationally at this level than almost anything else Little League can do? I mean some of these countries must be growing weary of being cannon fodder for the U.S.A. to trample over all the time.

Or throw all the team in the Final Four or Final Eight or whatever into one pool and play single-elimination from there. It's not really a "level playing field" when the International field is stacked with two or three championship caliber talent and only one team gets through to play a U.S. team that had to stretch to maybe win one game to get to the finale. The American team year after year seems to be able to set up it's pitching to win the tournament, while the World teams have to play hard every game just to get to the Final.

I would still watch a Japan-Curacao WS final.

Just a thought.

Guilt Beyond a Reasonable Doubt....

BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT


In this weekends ESPN Outside the Lines episode entitled "Greater Baseball Sin: PED's or Gambling" the WWLIS commemorated the 20th anniversary of Pete Rose's banishment from baseball by comparing the two relative evils.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=4417298&categoryid=3286128

In the discussion, Houston columnist Richard Justice made comment to the effect that regarding Hall of Fame voting and PED suspects "...if there is that reasonable doubt, these guys are not getting in." blah, blah, blah and "...character is an issue in HOF voting."

Now, granted these guys are not trained as attorneys--and Bob Ley is usually so much better at correcting obvious errors, sadly even he remained silent--but I immediately thought that the American system of justice is predicated on the premise that if there is a reasonable doubt--in the words of Johnny Cochran--you must acquit. And this does not mean that the person charged is considered "innocent", just that the burden of proof--borne by the accuser--has not been met. The accused does not have to prove his innocence because in many cases one cannot prove a negative.

So I did some research.

From http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/q016.htm
we find the following definition of reasonable doubt.

REASONABLE DOUBT - The level of certainty a juror must have to find a defendant guilty of a crime. A real doubt, based upon reason and common sense after careful and impartial consideration of all the evidence, or lack of evidence, in a case.

Proof beyond a reasonable doubt, therefore, is proof of such a convincing character that you would be willing to rely and act upon it without hesitation in the most important of your own affairs. However, it does not mean an absolute certainty.

OK, that's what I thought.

From Wikipedia under "burden of proof" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof

The "standard of proof" is the level of proof required in a legal action to discharge the burden of proof, that is to convince the court that a given proposition is true. The degree of proof required depends on the circumstances of the proposition. Typically, most countries have two levels of proof or the balance of probabilities:
beyond a reasonable doubt -- (highest level of proof, used mainly in criminal trials)
preponderance of evidence -- (lowest level of proof, used mainly in civil trials)
In addition to these, the U.S. introduced a third standard called clear and convincing evidence, which is the medium level of proof, used, for example, in cases in which the state seeks to terminate parental rights.

THE BURDEN OF PROOF


Now, I'm not going to go into the merits of individual cases, but it boggles my mind that the American past time and its leadership would bypass fundamentally American values and beliefs about justice in this area.

As a baseball fan, it is ironic that I enjoy watching the pro football induction ceremony more than the baseball version. In football, the players and the presenters, seem genuinely humbled by the honor and take great effort to acknowledge where the Glory truly belongs. And it's not on themselves.

Football's induction ceremony is a celebration of the players and owners who jointly have left sweat and blood on the fields and in the stadiums to advance "The Game". They seem to be able to put aside whatever disagreements they may have as individual constituents to at least celebrate each others contribution and the game itself for at least one afternoon. Baseball can take a lesson from them.

The baseball players come off as pompass jackasses who feel that they are being rightfully deified and place at the right hand of God. I mean Jim Rice didn't wait much longer than the length of a home stand before launching into an attack at his "lesser" peers who currently patrol the fields and ply the trade. For crying out loud, the guy barely got in on his merits--which given the self-absorbed, self-indulgent chowder head alumni and media that pushed him over the edge with endless politicking--and he has the nerve to criticize Derek Jeter. AYFKM???!!!

Rice's comments and Justice's faux pas or Freudian slip demonstrate the hateful attitude that lives in the hearts of most in the baseball media and former ball players. It is fundamentally destructive to the very game that these jackasses profess to love.

These guys are accusing people of committing "crimes against baseball". If that is the case, they need to understand the burden of proof required and not hide behind the skirt of the court of public opinion for a lowered, lynch mob standard of proof.

Maybe we should take the responsibility away from the writers and the veterans committee who have clear conflicts of interests and inherent biases, and leave it to the computer geeks.

From the Wall Street Journal: A Computer Cracks the Cooperstown Code
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124864577360682129.html

Giants Draft Post-Mortem and stretch run synopsis

Figures from Baseball America article, "How much did your team spend?"
http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/draft/?p=1763

The Giants ran the table and signed 10 of their first ten round draft picks. They actually signed seventeen or their first eighteen picks. The first whiff was 18th pick Jonathan Walsh who was highly rated coming into his senior HS year but disappointed and will play at the University of Texas.

Fifteen of the thirty teams in major league baseball managed to sign 100% of their first ten picks in addition to the G-men. This shows the emphasis on the first ten rounds. If anybody past the 10th round hits for you, the draft can become something special.

Total bonuses paid in the first ten round ranged from $1.9 million paid by the Mets (way to mail it in Mutts) to $10.9 million paid out by the Nationals (for 10 players). The Mariners came in second in bonus payouts at $10.7 million (for 12 players).

Those free-agent signings are working out so well for the Metsies that I guess they couldn't find any spare change in the seat cushions at Bailout Field to sign any youngsters.

The Rangers were next cheapest, spending $1.9 million to sign 7 of their 11 picks. This gave them the lowest success rate at 64%, with the Mets coming at 78% for the fourth lowest success rate. The Rays at 70% and the Blue Jays at 75% were #2/3 in the signing futility derby.

This all makes the Giants 10 picks signed for $5.8 millions seem very reasonable, more so since they were drafting towards the top of the round(s). The "average" team signed nine of their first ten picks and spent $5.3 million in bonuses. The "median" was $4.6 million and 9.6 out of 10 picks signed.

This has been the Giants strength in the last few years--spending dollars through the draft and International free agency.

The Giants have now spent about $5.8M this year, $9.1 in 2008--primarily to sign Posey, $7.4M in 2007--when they had some early supplemental picks, and $4.4 in 2006. About $27M over the past four drafts, that should begin to pay major league dividends beginning next year.

Now, if they can just keep Sabean away from the cash register and prevent another Zito $18.5M, Randy Winn $9.25M, Edgar Renteria $8M signing, we should be OK.

I'm even willing to give Sabs a bogey on Bengie Molina $6M, Randy Johnson at $8M, an Aaron Rowand at $9.6M because they have filled a need and have come reasonably close to performing as expected, if not as paid.

A lot of those deals come off the books after this year led by:
Randy Winn $9.25M
Randy Johnson $8M
Dave Roberts $6.5M (WOW, what a waste of salary)
Bengie Molina $6M
Bobby Howry $2.75M
Rich Aurilia and Juan Uribe @ $1M each

clears almost $34M in salary. An additional $4.75 should come off by not offering arbitration to Noah Lowry @ $4.75M. That leaves about $38.75M to play with.

Even after deciding whether to re-up Freddie Sanchez (club option)--which will goose him from $6.25 closer to $8M--the Giants only have to approach 1st year arbitration deals with Lincecum, Wilson, Jonathan Sanchez, Garko and Frandsen.

You could make all those guys happy--although I would think long and hard about blocking Ishakawa with Garko--and still have enough left over for a power hitting corner outfielder (or two) which the minor league system seems wholly incapable of producing.

Then the Giants will be back as a serious contender.
-------------
As for the here and now:

The Giants are a still hanging in there--given the punchers chance that the pitching staff allows--even at this late stage of the season.

The Dodgers will wrap things up and cruise in with 95+ wins. The Cardinals should coast to the Central at around 90 wins. The Phillies can mail it in and still win the East with about 95 wins. Any one of these three can advance to the World Series.

The Rockies could win 90 and that would ice the wild card for them. The Giants and Marlins should get 85+ wins but will likely fall short. For the Giants 88-74 would be a literal and figurative turnaround from the last couple of dismal years and raise expectations for next year.

Atlanta and Chicago seem to be in the pretender category and each looks like they will pull a hammy to get 85 wins.

In the junior circuit:

The Yankees should cruise in the East with possibly 100 wins. The Angels will get close at 95+ wins to close out the West. In the Central, the Tigers seem ready to close out the White Sox with both struggling to get to 85 wins. One of those two teams will keep out a more deserving Sawks or Rangers team--both of whom may surpass 90 wins.

Ironically, both leagues may have four 90 plus win teams, but the NL will have all four in the playoffs and the AL will likely only have three make the post-season. Maybe Jayson Stark or the ditto-heads at ESPN can get with the owners and figure out a better system to prevent that from happening instead of focusing on screwing up the draft.

Anyway, the Rays will disappoint the faithful at between 85-90 wins, normally a good year in Tampa Bay. The Twinkees will struggle to .500 but amazingly still could get hot and win the division.

Happens every year. Should be an interesting five or six weeks and then the second season starts.

IBAF response to IOC snub....Go World Baseball Classic

The International Baseball Federation--headed by Dr. Harvey Schiller--seemingly did more than enough positive work trying to get baseball and softball re-instated in time for the 2016 Olympics. Unfortunately, their efforts--along with those of Major League Baseball--fell on deaf ears at the International Olympic Committee.

Hopefully, now MLB can move forward unilaterally in it's efforts to promote baseball internationally. Maybe now we won't hear quotes from Dick Pound or WADA or USADA anymore. Those guys are out of the picture now, by their own choice.

Below is Dr. Schiller's post-mortem message sent to supporters.

August 17, 2009

Dear Colleague,

As you know, last Thursday we received the disappointing news that the IOC Executive Committee had chosen not to put forward baseball as one of the two sports for a general vote for the 2016 Olympics. Although the announcement was not what we had hoped for, it certainly does not detract from the great progress the sport of baseball is making globally, nor does it minimize the great collective effort by all involved to present the best possible case for baseball’s re-instatement for the Olympics. The fact remains, now more than ever, that baseball is a vibrant, growing sport played and enjoyed by millions and is reflective of all the Olympics are supposed to stand for, whether included in the programme or not.

First, we owe a word of thanks to all those who went above and beyond to assist us in the process leading into Thursday. That includes all the Federations, who not only enlisted the help of their IOC members but who also rallied so much local support for us on our Facebook and website efforts, along with the many people who wrote letters to key IOC members, ranging from college coaches and administrators to government and sport officials from around the world. The support we received was unprecedented and we are confident in the long run that it will benefit the growth of baseball, so long as we keep the momentum going. We would also be remiss in not acknowledging and thanking those at the highest level of the sport, Major League Baseball and the NPB, for all their assistance as well. The game would be nowhere without their efforts, and the support of Commissioner Selig, President Dupuy and Players Association Executive Director Fehr, as well as all the MLB owners and staff, is greatly appreciated. Lastly, there are our staff and Executive Committee, who also did everything possible until the final minutes to rally support. Thank you all for your efforts, they did not go unnoticed.

With regard to “what went wrong” in the Olympic process, it is probably not healthy or productive to spend much time looking back. We effectively addressed all the questions the IOC had with regard to reinstatement. We had unprecedented support from Major League Baseball, the Players Association and the Japanese League with regard to scheduling concessions and player availability, and even submitted a list of statements from top players to the IOC in the last week with regard to player commitment. The one thing MLB could not do was stop the season for the 2016 Olympics, especially without knowing which city was being selected as host. It is not a concession asked of soccer or tennis or other sports, and we did everything possible to provide the best alternative plan that would include using top players for the five day tournament. It is important to note that NOT ONE professional or top amateur player, when asked, said he would not participate in 2016 if his country qualified and he was selected. Not one.

We were also disappointed to see, even with all the concessions made, that a number of members of the IOC Executive Committee who said they would support baseball chose not to support the sport when the vote was taken. Of the countries where we thought we would have had 100% support…Italy, Japan, Puerto Rico, Germany and Mexico especially…we never received more than two votes per round, meaning for some reason unknown to us, even those countries where the sport is strong, officials still didn’t think that baseball should be part of the Olympic programme, despite all that we had done. It was clear from the start of the process that several senior IOC officials were in favor of rugby and golf and many comments made on and off the record supported that fact, so perhaps that is why we did not get the votes we were anticipating and had been promised last week.

Many have also asked about re-submitting a bid for 2020. At this point we do not think that would be prudent for a number of reasons, the biggest of which is that baseball has now been rejected twice by the senior members of the IOC, which is a clear message that despite any changes we make, we are not part of their plan. Also contrary to what we were originally told, the two sports that made it to the vote in Copenhagen, golf and rugby, have been informed they will be part of the programme in 2020. This was yet another clear message that the IOC has no interest in baseball. It makes much more sense to spend all our time, money and effort in continued development of the game around the world, as opposed to making futile attempts to work with a group that has no interest in partnering with baseball.

That being said, baseball is a sport that is full of infinite possibilities and resilience. Therefore, it is best that we look forward to what can be a very bright future.

In just this coming month, we will continue to see championship play on many levels, from youth championships like Little League and Pony League to the much-anticipated World Cup, as well as the World Series and the Japanese Championship later in the fall. The announcement of professional baseball returning to Australia and Israel, along with the continued growth and promotion of baseball in Italy and the Netherlands at a top level will continue to give us a growing presence in Europe, and we are very encouraged by development in emerging nations like Ghana, Nigeria, Pakistan, India, South Africa, Sri Lanka and China among many others. The plans to continue to expand the World Baseball Classic are also ongoing, and there remains strong interest from several sites to host the 2010 Women’s World Cup and continue to develop baseball for girls and young women. All of that is very positive and shows us that we are very much on the right track in growing the game with our partners.

Do we have challenges? Yes. We are aware that some Federations may lose some funding as a result of not being on the Olympic programme, and we remain concerned about the split that softball continues to push with federations in several countries. However we feel that by working together and using economies of scale, identifying new partners and showing what a great social unifier the sport can be, all these problems can be overcome. Baseball after all, is perhaps the sport that teaches teamwork and overcoming adversity better than any other. That is what helps make it such a great game.

In closing I want to personally thank you for your support of our efforts in my two years as President. I am very proud of not just the effort we made, but the way we made the effort. We did not waste money on high priced teams of consultants or advertising campaigns that were proved by other sports to be pointless and a distraction from the mission of growing the sport. Instead we concentrated on telling the stories, building consensus, aligning long term support and exposing the game to as wide an audience as possible, and those efforts, with or without the Olympics, have created a much more solid base for year round effective growth of baseball than ever existed before.

As always, any comments, questions or thoughts are welcomed. I hope to see you soon.

Best regards,



Dr. Harvey W. Schiller
President
International Baseball Federation

Giants get their man....Nats sign Strasburg

I'M GOING TO WAIT 'TIL THE MIDNIGHT HOUR - E.D.T.


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/08/17/SPAE199V02.DTL&feed=rss.giants

With four minutes to go before a 9 p.m. PDT deadline, the Giants announced they had signed first-round draft pick Zach Wheeler. Baseball America reported the bonus was $3.3 million.

I guess waiting until the last minute was worth it to Wheeler and his agent as they sign for $900K over the apparent slot level.

The Giants say in the article that Wheeler will not appear at the minor league level. They have previously reported that Buster Posey will not be brought up this year and I suppose they will also try not to rush Bumgarner as well.
---------
The Nats went to the wire but got their man as well, signing Stephen Strasburg for a reported 4 years, $15.1M.

In addition to Strasburg there was a late flurry of 1st round signings. And the after-party apparently was held at the Scott Boras Agency early this morning, according to ESPN:

Scott Boras represented six of the unsigned first-round picks, including Strasburg and the second, third, ninth, 13th and 30th selections.

In addition to Strasburg, he negotiated a $9.5 million five-year contract for Dustin Ackley, a North Carolina center fielder taken by No. 2 Seattle; a $3.25 million signing bonus for Donavan Tate, a center fielder from Cartersville High School in Georgia selected No. 3 by San Diego; a $5.5 million, six-year contract for Jacob Turner, a right-hander from Westminster Christian Academy in Missouri taken by No. 9 Detroit; and a $2.75 million signing bonus for Grant Green, a Southern Cal shortstop drafted No. 13 by Oakland.

Tate had planned to play football and baseball at North Carolina.

A source told ESPN's Steve Phillips that Strasburg will receive a $7.5 million signing bonus with $2.5 million paid 15 days after approval of the contract, $2.5 million paid in January 2010 and another $2.5 million paid in January 2011.

He is scheduled to receive a $400,000 salary in 2009, but that is prorated to approximately $100,000. He then will get a $2 million salary in 2010, $2.5 million in 2011 and $3 million in 2012.

The Texas Rangers failed to sign their first round pick HS LHP Matt Purke. The Kansas City Royals did not sign RHP Aaron Crowe, who is still eligible to sign having used up his college eligibility. The Rays also failed to sign their #1, HS 2B LeVon Washington.

The status of Giants draft picks as clock winds down

*** As of 6 PM Central time, Monday August 17th***

Six hours until the clock strikes midnight.

The Giants first ten round draft picks and their bonus received. Wheeler is sitting with the slot above him signed at $2.4 million and the slot below him signed for $2.4 million. Not much wiggle room left there, bud.

6th rounder Matthew Graham was signed above slot. He was committed to North Carolina and slipped. Signing him is a big plus.

If they can sign Wheeler late and pick up 17th rounder Walsh, this shapes up potentially as another very, very productive draft for the G-men.

2009 Draftees Bonus
1 Zach Wheeler RHP 6-4,170 East Paulding HS (GA) unsigned
2 Tommy Joseph C 6-1,210 Desert Ridge HS (AZ) $712,000
3 Chris Dominguez 3B 6-5, 220 Louisville $411,300
4 Jason Stoffel RHP 6-2,220 Arizona $254,700
5 Brandon Belt 1B 6-5,210 Texas $200,000
6 Matthew Graham RHP 6-4, 225 Oak Ridge HS (TX) $500,000
7 Nick Liles 2B Western Carolina $120,000
8 Gus Benusa OF Riverview HS (PA) $125,000
9 Evan Crawford CF 6-2, 205 Indiana $110,000
10 Jeremey Toole RHP Brigham Young $80,000
17 Jonathan Walsh C 6-2, 175 Coppen HS ???


$2,513,000 is the total spent on the first ten rounds, that total could double if Wheeler is added. Not bad, boys.

Is Strasburg worth $75 million?

Not if you listen to the chattering nabobs parroting the party line about how "the draft needs to be restructured"--"it's not working right"--"it's insane that a guy who hasn't thrown a pitch in the bigs makes this much money", etc., etc.

But in a free, open market I don't see why Strasburg wouldn't command over $50 million. Would major league teams be better off without a draft? Or do they just want one that suppresses bonuses below their intelligence level? They hold the checkbooks and the budgets. For the life of me, I don't understand why otherwise intelligent businessmen feel the need to have the heavy hand of regulations save them from themselves. But, if they can get away with it, more power to them, I guess.

Take the Dice-K example of a premier talent made available to all 30 teams to see what could happen in a Strasburg Open Market.

The Red Sox won the bidding by paying approximately $50 million to the Japanese team that owned his "rights". Granted, not all of that "rights fee" money would flow directly to the player in an open, unfettered market.

But would perhaps half of that amount be included in an open market bidding war? I don't see why not. Granted, Dice-K was a relatively proven commodity. He had pitched against major leaguers and came away with glowing reviews.

Strasburg will eventually generate similar reviews, and then some, if his power fastball and quality breaking stuff make the same impact in the majors as they did in the college ranks. I know he won't be throwing against UC-Santa Barbara anymore but there is always the Pirates. I'm not sure his K/9IP, WHIP or BAvg against him are going to change much barring injury.

The bottom line is, 102 MPH is 102 MPH. To take the George Young "Planet Theory" and transplant it from football to baseball--there are only so many people on the planet capable of throwing a baseball 102 MPH. It would behoove the Nats to try to acquire as many of such players as they can. If they finish last again, there is no guarantee that a nearly major league ready, potential top of the rotation starter will be available. Although--the next LeBron--Bryce Harper would not be a bad consolation prize.

It would also behoove Mr. Strasburg to sign and not hold out. His star will never be higher. It can't be elevated by pitching against Indy leaguers or the same crop of collegians he just dominated this year. And I don't believe for a second that the Japanese teams are dumb enough to insert themselves in the middle of a negotiation ploy.

I would like to see some changes made to the draft, i.e. ability to trade draft picks (maybe limited to top 5 rounds). I think the inclusion of Cuban and Dominican players in the draft just on the basis of fundamental fairness to American kids is an issue that needs to be looked into. Perhaps this will alleviate some of the problems of "agents" and MLB front-office types cheating kids out of their bonuses if the market is not some shadowy, black-market dealing in baseball talent.

Before the clock strikes the midnight deadline, I believe that the deal gets done. It may set another record and generate lots of fresh meat for the talk show circuit, but overall a Strasburg signing is good for baseball and great for the Nationals and their fans.

But will the Veterans Committee salute Pete Rose?

ASK THESE GUYS HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT IT


FROM THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: BASEBALL'S HAUL OF FAME

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203547904574279891736968048.html

I'M SURE THEY WILL NEVER ADMIT TO LETTING SUCH ISSUES CLOUD THEIR VOTING.

Mr. Sutton did not mention other, more commercial considerations that might run through the head of a recently inducted Hall of Famer. Cooperstown considers money talk vulgar, perhaps even sacrilegious.

BUT......

But baseball nostalgia is a multibillion-dollar industry, and the 60 or so living Hall of Famers at its pinnacle are in a unique position to cash in. Generally, retired players earn baseball money signing autographs, hawking memorabilia, giving speeches, making public appearances, endorsing products and doing public relations.

OBVIOUSLY TO THE NO-DOUBT HALL OF FAMERS, IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE. IT'S THE MARGINAL GUYS THAT SCREW IT UP WITH THE OVER-INFLATED OPINION OF THEIR SELF-IMPORTANCE THAT COMES WITH MEMBERSHIP.

Some stars were so great that being in the hall doesn’t add much to their market value. Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, Sandy Koufax, Cal Ripken and a few other transcendent figures would command top dollar even without Cooperstown. But for more marginal immortals such as Mr. Rice, Mr. Sutton, Gary Carter, Orlando Cepeda, Ryne Sandberg or Goose Gossage, getting into the hall is worth a great deal of money.

AND MONEY IS AT THE ROOT OF IT, DON'T KID YOURSELF.

On the day Mr. Gossage’s election was announced, in mid-January 2007, I spent several hours with him and his agent, Andrew Levy. Their cellphones never stopped ringing. Mr. Gossage bantered with George Brett, Joe Torre and other baseball friends who called to offer congratulations. Meanwhile, Mr. Levy furiously fielded business offers. “Until now, he’s been getting between $7,500 and $10,000 per speech,” Mr. Levy told me. “Today, his price just tripled.” The Goose had laid a golden egg.

THERE'S GOLD IN THEM THERE H.O.F. INITIALS.

“‘HoF’ after a signature is the single best predictor of baseball price,” says Steve Verkman, proprietor of Clean Sweep Auctions, one of the country’s largest memorabilia dealerships. He estimates there are about 10,000 collectors around the world interested exclusively in Hall of Famer items, and many more general collectors who covet them. There is an active market in Cooperstown futures, and when someone unexpected is chosen by the Hall of Fame, prices go through the roof. “When Bruce Sutter went in, that changed everything for him,” Mr. Verkman told me. “The demand for his autograph increased a thousand-fold.”

IT SETS THESE GUYS UP FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES.

The Hall of Fame credential means steady income for life. “Robin Roberts had a great career, but that was a long time ago and he wasn’t in a major market,” a senior executive at Steiner Memorabilia told me. “Because he’s in Cooperstown, his annual baseball income, not counting his pension, is probably in the low six figures.”

Hall of Fame-derived money is a rock-solid annuity.

WILL THE REMAINING LIVING MEMBERS VOTE TO FURTHER DILUTE THEIR SHARES IF THE CANDIDATE IN QUESTION DOES NOTHING TO INCREASE THE SIZE OF THE PIE?

In recent years the money pot has grown as the Hall of Fame, which produces and markets its own line of merchandise, has been forced to give 30% of the profits to its inductees. According to Marvin Miller, very likely the world’s greatest expert on baseball economics, this helps explain why the Veterans Committee, composed of Hall of Famers, consistently refuses to exercise its mandate to elect previously overlooked old-timers. “Nobody wants to dilute the value of his stock,” Mr. Miller told me.

In Cooperstown mythology, players ascend to the hall effortlessly, like angels being called to the right hand of God. But with so much money on the table, reality is less ethereal. Players campaign hard. Once they used corny gimmicks, like Bob Lemon sending each voter a box with a lemon in it. Nowadays, campaigns are much more sophisticated and aggressive. Bert Blyleven’s candidacy has been guided by Bill Hillsman, a political consultant who worked for Paul Wellstone and Jesse Ventura. Illinois Sen. Dick Durban’s office has worked on behalf of ex-Cub third baseman Ron Santo. The government of Venezuela hired Washington lobbyist Tim Gay to mount a Hall of Fame campaign for Hugo Chávez’s favorite shortstop, Dave Concepcion.

EVEN DEAD PEOPLE CONTINUE TO KNOCK ON THE DOOR.

Even Shoeless Joe Jackson, banned from baseball and dead more than 50 years, is now campaigning for Cooperstown. CMG Worldwide, which represents Jackson’s estate, runs a Web site dedicated to marshaling support among fans who believe Jackson was unfairly punished for his alleged role in the 1919 Black Sox scandal. CMG feels the same way, of course, but its lobbying isn’t completely disinterested. Jackson’s plaque in the Hall of Fame would probably be worth half a million dollars a year to his corporate heirs. Jackson, who died penniless, would have been astonished by such a posthumous haul of fame.

So the issue for Pete may come down to whether these guys want to further dilute their shares in H.O.F. Enterprises by allowing him entry. Does his membership increase the size of the pie enough to make it worth there while? We shall see.

IOC TELLS BASEBALL AND SOFTBALL TO DROP DEAD

In favor of golf and rugby. GREAT!! I hope they don't try to bring the Games to Chicago now. Not without baseball and softball. NO SIR!!

According to the IBAF:

IBAF Statement Regarding IOC’s Announcement on Re-instatement To The Olympic Programme For 2016

(LAUSANNE, Switzerland) – The International Baseball Federation (IBAF) today issued the following statement after the announcement earlier today in Berlin on which two sports would be put forth for a vote in October in Copenhagen for re-instatement for the 2016 Olympics.

“The IBAF would like to congratulate golf and rugby on their selection today. Both will be welcome additions to the Olympic programme and should add great excitement to which ever city is selected to host the Olympic Games in 2016. We also want to wish nothing but the best to karate, roller sports, softball and squash, who were also not selected today. All of the seven sports under consideration have proven through the selection process that they are worthy of Olympic Games inclusion.

SELIG CONSIDERS PARDONING PETE ROSE??

Or is he in reality passing the buck to the Veterans Committee? And won't the baseball writers do much the same thing fundamentally with the "steroid" guys going forward?

FROM THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS:

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/2009/07/27/2009-07-27_pete_rose.html

Thanks to the behind-the-scenes lobbying from some of the most influential Hall of Famers, commissioner Bud Selig is said to be seriously considering lifting Pete Rose's lifetime suspension from baseball.

The guys who played with Rose are starting to show sympathetic cracks in the wall that has kept Rose out. He was passed over by the sportswriters due to the climate of fear du jour.

Better re-consider the Shoeless Joe Jackson case, if you're going to allow Pete Rose in. I still maintain that Rose represented--to an entire generation of parents, coaches and players--a living, breathing, Charlie-hustling example of how the game should be played. What he was involved in after his playing career was over should not hold him back.

Maybe we can expand Hank Aaron's suggestion the PED suspects plaques are asterisked and apply a "gambling asterisk" to Pete's plaque. Then we can go back and asterisk the entire original class and anyone else who played while the game was segregated with a "segregation asterisk". Pretty soon, there wouldn't be too many guys in there without an asterisk. Like the football guys say, it's a Hall of Fame, not a Hall of Saints.

If Selig does reinstate him, Rose then would become eligible for the Hall of Fame, but on the Veterans Committee ballot, as his 15 years on the Baseball Writers ballot expired during his time on the ineligible list. He would thus have to be elected by his peers, the 65 living members in the Hall of Fame, not all of whom agree with Aaron, Morgan and Robinson that Rose has done his time. It's hard to say if he would get the necessary 75% for election. "I know there are still guys who feel strongly against him," said one Hall of Famer, "and I don't know if that would change even if Selig clears him."

Now what Selig can do is say to the Veterans Committee--the remaining living members--"If you want him in, he's all yours". And the baseball writers will handle the steroid guys in the same manner in the future. They will get a 15-year penance or waiting period where the writers as a voting bloc will pass on anyone remotely close to the PED issue.

Then as the composition of the remaining living members changes to include these players peer group, the same sympathy for their overall career will kick in and in the same manner as we are seeing for Rose.

The only thing I see changing the issue markedly is if the writers somehow vote in a guy who was judged pristine by them and then is revealed to have been conclusively involved in PED's.

Then the whole complexion of the game changes.

DAVID ORTIZ AND THE "ABILITY TO DRAW WALKS"

Not surprisingly, ESPN's Steve Phillips made a shockingly bad "defense" of David Ortiz and his legacy in the aftermath of the revelation that Ortiz was a positive test in 2003. Phillips made the case that he "observed" Ortiz' development from his days with the Twins into a player who "learned" how to take walks and become a more patient hitter and that this, more than anything else, was responsible for the staggering numbers he produced with the Red Sox.


From ESPN's You Tube Site: Phillips comments are at about the 1:45 mark

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqfPkw4uzLU

I could just imagine Joe Morgan throwing something at his TV screen as well, because this is one of the themes that emanated from the "Moneyball" revolution that is wholly erroneous on a macro basis and certainly weak/non-existent in the individual example of David Ortiz.

Many who read "Moneyball" came away with the impression that the A's used statistical analysis to identify high-OPS, high-walk ratio hitters in the college ranks, who had a greater probability for success at the major league level. This was an extension of the strategy employed at the major league level, which was to identify these type of players and acquire those who were not valued as highly as their peers--who were using other metrics to acquire/reward hitters.

The A's were able to acquire productive players economically and compete for a time at the major league level. I still maintain that this ability to compete only lasted as long as the starting staff included Zito, Hudson and Mulder but that's another story.

Anyway, the A's model at the player developmental level was highlighted by their drafting of a catcher by the name of Jeremy Brown, who they identified as being one of these high-OPS, high walk ratio guys. He was drafted by the A's higher than virtually anyone would have projected--meaning they overpaid for him--which seemingly defeated the purpose of acquiring talent economically, but I digress.

Many of the other guys they identified while the author followed the process--guys like Nick Swisher and Khalil Greene--subsequently developed into good major league hitters. But most if not all of these players did not follow the model that the A's suggested they would to succeed.

In the same way, David Ortiz did not follow the "model" as Steve Phillips believes he did.

The model suggest that there is some inherent ability to work the count, exhibit patience as a hitter and draw walks, thus becoming a high-OPS, productive hitter that contributes to more team wins. The productivity flows from this perceived ability that can be somehow identified statistically.

What the model ignores is the human elements that cannot be quantified until after the fact, if at all.

The high-OPS, high walk rate flows from the hitter earning RESPECT from the pitcher. Once the pitcher believes that he can be hurt by throwing pitches in certain zones-- which tightens the window that pitchers can throw to--thereby increasing the hitters walk rate. That does not happen until the hitter "hurts" the pitcher and earns respect.

To extrapolate to the extreme, if you had a hitter with fighter pilots 20/10 vision, who could identify balls/strikes with a 99% success ratio compared to Questec--but couldn't hit a lick--how many walks would that hitter draw at any level above Little League? Probably not many.

As hitters advance from one level to the next, whether it's from HS to college, college to low minors, minors to majors--that RESPECT must be earned again.

That is why you will see virtually all of the A's players identified in college as the prototype, model high-OPS, high walk-rate player not statistically demonstrate that "ability" as they enter the minor league system. Why? They have to earn RESPECT of the pitchers all over again. Pitchers who didn't read the hitters stat sheets or press clippings and are trying to earn their own measure of RESPECT.

Respect is earned, and as the Dominicans say, "You can't walk off the island". Respect is earned with the bat. Ted Williams earned his reputation with the bat first and then the high walk rate followed. Respect was earned from pitchers and umpires and the walks followed.

Look at Ortiz ' career stats from Baseball Reference:

DAVID ORTIZ CAREER STATS FROM BASEBALL REFERENCE.COM
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/o/ortizda01.shtml

You can clearly see he debuts with the Twins in 1997 as an above average hitter as measured by an OPS of .802 and an OPS+ of 107 (OPS+ of 100 is major league average, it is OPS--On Base Average + Slugging--compared to the league average). His Walk Rate (Walks divided by Plate Appearances) of 4%. FOUR PERCENT!! OK only 51 AB's, but it demonstrates what players do when they advance levels. They try to show their talent.

In 1998, his Walk Rate stabilizes at 12%, which becomes his baseline for the next couple of years. His OPS is .817 and OPS+ is 111.

1999 is a lost year, only 25 Plate Appearances, statistically meaningless.

2000, Walk Rate - 12%. OPS - .810, OPS+ - 101
2001, Walk Rate - 12%, OPS - .799, OPS+ - 106
2002, Walk Rate - 9%, OPS - .839, OPS+ 120

A Bit of a breakout as a hitter, higher OPS with a LOWER walk rate. Hardly the skill or ability that Phillips is articulating. Then the trade to the Red Sox.

2003 OPS rises to .961, OPS+ rises to 144 and yet walk rate only comes back to the original baseline of 12%. Again, hardly what Phillips was articulating. More like Ortiz is finding his wheels as a power hitter, a force--but pitchers still are not convinced.

In 2004 again OPS rises to .983, OPS+ rises to 145 and yet WALK RATE declines to 11%. The OPPOSITE of what Phillips says he observed.

Finally in 2005, OPS cracks 1.001, OPS + rises again to 158 and now pitchers appear to be convinced, elevating Ortiz' walk rate to 14.5%.

Ortiz punished pitchers for 2-3 years before THEY ADJUSTED, by giving Ortiz the RESPECT as a hitter that he EARNED. We're not seeing some inherent ability to draw walks that flows into increased production. We're seeing quite the opposite.

More interesting is the recent history.

In 2006 OPS - 1.049, OPS+ - 161, Walk Rate - 16%
In 2007 OPS - 1.066, OPS+ - 171, Walk Rate - 16%

In 2008 OPS falls to .877, OPS+ to 123 and walk rate follows to 14%.
In 2009 OPS plummets to .720, OPS+ to 82 and walk rate drops to 11%.

What happened? The "ability" to draw walks should be getting better with age, but we see that RESPECT is lost. Scouts whisper, "Ortiz lost bat speed, can't turn on the good FB anymore" and more than whisper, they write this in their advance reports which are read by pitchers and catchers. And the rest is history.

It doesn't even matter WHY Ortiz lost bat speed. Take the PED speculation out of your mind for a moment and it's crystal clear what happens at the cellular level in MLB. And it's been happening like this for generations and will continue to do so. The other issues just muddy the waters a little bit.

We see the same thing with uber-prospects like Colby Rasmus. When they debut in the majors, they have all this advance billing baggage and mega-bonus money to validate.
And that is what they try to do. And pitchers initially exploit that, yes. But the bottom line is this: If this is even a chicken/egg debate, it seems pretty clear which comes first.

The debate remains if plate discipline is a teachable, identifiable skill or an inherent, God-given skill. The old nature vs. nurture argument. Good luck winning one of those.

Are some hitters so "hard-wired" in their approach since their youth days to be either a "hacker" or a "selective" hitter that they cannot be changed after HS-collegiate level?

Does the pressure to perform either to justify money/publicity received or potentially obtained in the future create such "internal noise" that players cannot be changed significantly?

Perhaps the truth lies somewhere in between the extremes and includes some measure of all the extrinsic variables. Maybe there are just too many human variables to quantify as efficiently as we would like. Put that in your spreadsheet and smoke it.

AND DOWN THE STRETCH THEY COME....

OK, now that the trade deadline has come and gone, we can separate the contenders from the pretenders.

In the National League:

The Phillies and Dodgers are loaded up for the playoffs, having pretty much locked up their respective divisions. The Cubs, who made a tepid effort to improve the roster and may lose the Central to the Cardinals, who made one of the best moves in acquiring Matt Holliday.

The loser of the Central division run, likely the Cubs, will front run the wild card chase with the Rockies and Giants looking to be the main competition.

The Giants helped themselves with Garko/Sanchez. The Rockies reinforced the bullpen. It remains to be seen which teams tinkering has the best effect.

The Marlins and maybe even the Braves remain in the chase, but both teams have to go to the whip pretty soon.

Thanks for participating medallions can go the the Mets, Brewers, Astros, Pirates, Diamondbacks, Reds, Padres and Nationals.

Amazingly, the Pirates garage sale may have the biggest impact on who is looking in and who is making an early tee time when the playoffs begin.

In the American League:

Two divisional races here. The East features the Yankees / Red Sox, the Central may come down to the Tigers and White Sox. The Angels appear to have the West locked up.

This may leave the Rays, Rangers, Twins on the outside looking in come October. The Mariners, Jays, A's, Indians, Orioles and Royals are looking forward to auditioning September call-ups and 2010 visions of grandeur. Here the Indians played the role of the Pirates with their fire sale prices for major league quality talent.