Search THT:

Or you can search by:

October 23, 2012

A few playoff nuggets

— How have the Tigers and Giants fared against each other in previous postseason encounters? Actually, they've never faced one another in the playoffs. Heading into the League Championship Series, this was the only one of the four potential World Series match-ups that never had happened before.

The Yankees and (New York and San Francisco) Giants have met seven times (1921, '22, '23, '36, '37, '51, '62), with the Bronx Bombers holding a 5-2 advantage. The Cardinals and Yankees have faced off five times (1926, '28, '42, 43, '64), with St. Louis winning three titles. The Cardinals and Tigers have squared off three times (1934, '68, 2006), with the Cards emerging victorious twice.

— Could we be watching both Most Valuable Players in this year's Fall Classic? Buster Posey seems to be the favorite in the National League, while Miguel Cabrera has a strong shot in the American League if those nerdy stats geeks focus just on the numbers.

You know, the Triple Crown, which contains one category (home runs) of obvious value, another (batting average) that is worthwhile in limited situations, and a third (RBI) that has as much to do with the guys hitting in front of a player as with that player's actually ability.

— The Giants are the second team in history to win three do-or-die games twice is a single postseason, joining the 1985 Royals. Kansas City came back from 3-1 deficits against Toronto in the ALCS and St. Louis in the World Series. As we just witnessed, San Francisco overcame a 2-0 hole in this year's best-of-five NLDS against Cincinnati and rallied from a 3-1 deficit in the NLCS.

— In its four League Championship Series wins, San Francisco outscored St. Louis, 27-2. The Cardinals and Yankees combined to score eight runs in their eight LCS losses, with New York looking like a relative powerhouse by plating six runners.

— The Redbirds are the first team to lose four playoff series after having a three-games-to-one lead. They also were the first, and still only, team to lose in three such scenarios. In addition to this season and the '85 World Series mentioned above, St. Louis dropped the 1968 championship to Detroit and the '96 NLCS to Atlanta.

— Boston is the only team to overcome a 3-1 series deficit three times, including the remarkable comeback from a 3-0 hole versus New York in the 2004 ALCS. The Red Sox also rallied against the Angels in the '86 American League Championship Series and the Indians in the 2007 ALCS.

The Royals the Pirates have achieved this feat twice each. KC's triumphs were mentioned above, while Pittsburgh defeated the Washington Senators in the 1925 World Series and Baltimore in the '79 Fall Classic.
Posted by: Greg Simons

March 06, 2012

A tribute to Don Mincher

For this writer, Don Mincher will always hold an important place. Mincher, who died on Sunday at the age of 73, was the first player I interviewed for my first book, "A Baseball Dynasty: Charlie Finley’s Swingin’ A’s."

Not only was Mincher the first, but he might have been the best of the interviews I did. Keep in mind that I really didn’t know what I was doing; I had done interviews before, but never for a full-length book, and this was a book for which I had not yet formulated a theme.

But Don made it easy. He spoke naturally and freely in giving me keen insights to the inner workings of the A’s circa 1971-72. He told me about the strong personalities who did not always agree with each other. He gave me advice on whom I should interview next, and which A’s I should perhaps steer away from.

(Off the record, he even told me about one ballplayer who might ask for money in exchange for an interview. That was good to know, since I had budgeted no money for the research process of writing the book!)

Most importantly, Don was friendly and accommodating. I didn’t feel like I was bothering him. If anything, he made it sound like he was grateful that somebody was taking an interest in his career and life in baseball.

There was plenty of reason to take interest, given his accomplishments, first as a ballplayer and later as a minor-league executive. He was humble about his playing days, preferring to talk about others, but he put up rock-solid numbers during his career.

A left-handed hitter with brute strength, Mincher hit with power and patience, totaling 200 home runs for his career while walking nearly as often as he struck out. During the decade of the deadball sixties, he put up OPS totals better than .800 six times.

He was the only man to play for both incarnations of the Washington Senators, making him the answer to a popular trivia question back in the seventies. He was also the only All-Star representative in the brief history of the Seattle Pilots.

Mincher played for two exceptional teams, the 1965 pennant-winning Twins and the world championship A’s of 1972. In the 1972 World Series, he helped the A’s win Game Four against the Reds with a pinch-hit RBI single, which turned out to be the final at-bat of his career.

The A’s decided not to bring him back for 1973, even though the American League had just voted into existence the new designated hitter rule. Mincher would have made an ideal DH, platooning against right-handed pitching, but no one saw fit to make him a concrete offer.

Unlike some ballplayers who struggle to find life after baseball, Mincher made a smooth transition to the front office. He eventually became the general manager of the Double-A Huntsville Stars, his hometown team, essentially running the franchise for more than 15 years. He then agreed to become the interim president of the Southern League before taking over operation of the league on a fulltime basis.

Before he retired last fall, Mincher impressed people throughout the minor league game with his easy-going manner, his smarts, his work ethic, and perhaps most of all, his integrity. He became a legendary figure in Huntsville, where he was beloved for simply being a gentleman.

I never met Mincher face-to-face, but I felt like I had during our lengthy phone conversation. If there is a way to make a lasting impression over the phone, Mincher was able to turn the trick.

Even though I talked to him only that one time, I’ll miss Don. For those who really knew him, for those who talked to him on a regular basis, I can only imagine how much they’ll miss him. Don Mincher was one of the good ones.

For more on Don Mincher’s career, please see Chris Jaffe’s THT Live entry on his career highlights.
Posted by: Bruce Markusen

January 23, 2012

Carmona points out an MLB inequity

Goodbye Fausto! Hello Roberto!

As reported last week, 28-year-old Fausto Carmona is Roberto Hernandez Heredia and perhaps 31 years old.

There are implications here for Carmona-Heredia, for the Indians and, most importantly, for professional baseball and the uneven way it deals with international players.

Since being released on bail, The Sinkerballer Formally Known as Fausto has been apologetic but tight-lipped. He reportedly paid for a false identity that may have incorrectly represented his age. He may have been making periodic payments to maintain the false identity. He eventually balked at paying and somebody talked, leading to his arrest.

He is not the first Latin-American player to take this route. (Last year's most publicized example was Leo Nunez.)

So Heredia lied. But did he do anything wrong to the game of baseball? Does lying about your age and name affect anything about playing the game?

It does not.

While the lies are certainly deplorable, they do not affect the player's ability on the field. People will say that, because his age is uncertain, it could be advantageous for him to have people think he is younger. It could lead to larger bonuses and salaries. He’ll appear more successful since his ability will be compared to that of players younger than him.

But these are issue of deceit based on the current economic model and do not affect the play on the field.

If the same player was actually three years YOUNGER, would we be willing to rectify the situation financially? What happened, as before, is a player found a way to take advantage of the economic system in baseball. For him to be successful, he still had to demonstrate ability and skill.

In doing so, he allegedly broke laws in at least two countries* but he never de-skilled the game. While the misreported younger age would have been helpful during his development, the lying did not give him specific extra ability, or his ability to ignore Lake Erie Midges that Joba Chamberlain could not. Carmona’s lies do not hurt the on-field play of baseball.

* I have no idea if Canada would say anything about a player such as Carmona entering the country with false paperwork. I’m not even sure Canada would prosecute, but I am fairly certain that it is against Canadian law.

When looking at a situation like Carmona’s, I look directly at those running Major League Baseball and the teams. Lying about one’s identity is so advantageous for a specific set of players that it outweighs the risk of punishment. Instead of demonizing players like Carmona and Nunez, it is time to look at the system.

In Japan, younger players are able to develop in a system that gives them the ability to play in their homeland with the possibility of moving to the major leagues in America. In Latin America, players feel the need to break the law to be part of the system. So in one week, Yu Darvish, who has never pitched in even the minor leagues in America, got a $60 million contract after a team paid $51.7 million for the right to give him that contract. During that same week, we learned that, once again a player lied about his identity in an effort to get a portion of that amount of money.

In the end, both players will succeed or fail based on what they do on the field. How they got the opportunity doesn’t affect their ability on the field.

Major League Baseball needs to address the differences. If baseball officials are going to continue to encourage teams to deal individually with international players, they need to address the extreme differences in the system. It is not an easy task. How can baseball expect players not to take the route of Carmona and Nunez when the Darvish situation points out the inequity?

As for the Indians:

While Carmona has not lived up to the promise he flashed in 2007, he has shown, when healthy, to be able to provide a decent set of 30-plus starts and 200-plus innings each year.

In conjunction with this news, it appears the Indians finally pulled the trigger on obtaining Kevin Slowey. The Indians have been interested in him anyway, so this was not in direct relation to Carmona’s issues, but the trade was probably hastened. Carmona will likely end up on the restricted list, leaving the Indians with a hole in the rotation but with an extra $7 million. The Indians gave up Zach Putman, a young pitcher who may have competed for a bullpen position this year.

The Indians have other options for the rotation. David Huff and Jeanmar Gomez will be among those who compete with Slowey for spots behind Justin Masterson, Ubaldo Jimenez, Josh Tomlin and Derek Lowe. In the end, the Indians' depth should be able to cover for Carmona's absence with limited hardship.
Posted by: Mat Kovach

January 16, 2012

PED injustice and the Hall

Hall of Fame vote is frustrating. Something is wrong with either the procedure or the people involved in the voting. This became clear when Barry Larkin’s deserving, and late, induction became a second tier story to who did not make it and the ongoing assault about the role of steroids or PEDs*.

* For the remainder, I’ll refer to PEDs to include steroids, HGH, etc.—anything that has been considered Performance Enhancing Drugs. It will also refer only to those performance enhancing drugs that are banned and/or tested for.


The leaking of Ryan Braun’s positive drug test, currently in appeal means at some point we’ll be forced to hear the opinion of members of the Baseball Writesr Association of America (who do the Hall voting) on the validity of numbers, the historical content of PEDs, and the presentation of evidence about PED usage by players. Even if Braun’s appeal is successful, we’ll hear writers' opinion about what should have been done if Braun was actually suspended.

There has to be more reason for this constant discussion than what is presented on the surface.

There are writers who say using drugs is illegal and people using PEDs* are therefore breaking the law which lacks integrity as well as specific rules of baseball. Despite that writers will vote for players, and support active players, even when they break the rules of baseball or demonstrate a lack of integrity.

* When I use the term "‘using PEDs" or "PED user" i am talking about people who have admitted to using PEDs and those who are simply suspected of using PEDs. It is impossible to tell if the writers are concerned if there is a difference. Given that I’ll group the convicted and suspected together for my discussion about writers.


The Hall of Fame includes admitted spitballer Gaylord Perry. Whitey Ford's plaque stands in the Hall despite his admission to throwing doctored baseballs, including in the 1962 All-Star game to strike out Willie Mays. Writers use the cheaters excuse inconsistently, so when they do trot it out, safely dismiss it.

A standard is set. Writers often use the statistical standard of the players in the Hall in arguments for or against players. They will use bad behavior only as a reason to not vote for somebody, ignoring substantial information that cheaters and other bad people are already in.

So writers will set various levels of badness to rules, allowing some to be broken without incurring penalty. Given the example of Perry and Ford, I have never heard of a writer who voted them into the Hall advocating allow the spitball to be part of the game. If one argument is that cheaters should not be in the Hall, how can the next argument be that people who didn’t cheat that badly can still be considered. Logically this does not sense.

When Derek Jeter feigned being hit by a pitch, even to the point of allowing the trainer to inspect him for injuries, writers, fans, and even the manager on the opposing team thought it was a good baseball move. Willfully lying to the umpire, a lie that because of the nature of the play could not visually determine if the ball hit Jeter, is good? I wonder if this commercial played during that game. Jeter’s action did the exact opposite of what we teach about integrity. This was not attempting to deceive another player or team but the people you want to make the right call on the field. If this lack of integrity is a good baseball move, then how can you argue that integrity is needed for be eligible for an award or getting into the Hall of Fame. People will point to Jeter's fake injury as a reason that he deserves to be in the Hall.

Writers' claims of PED users as cheaters lacking integrity still have not given a reason why they won’t vote for a PED user. They have a different agenda when they ostracize PED users.

Let’s remember PED users took advantage of a tool that allowed them to train better. The increased training made them better athletes, allowing them to improve their baseball skills. They used something that baseball, their own union, and the players themselves did not feel strongly enough about to eliminate by testing the players.

PEDs are no magic pill; you have to work hard to get any advantage from them. A number of players who used PEDs achieved little of note in baseball. At the very least, players who used PEDs and are in consideration of seasonal or lifetime awards worked very hard to get there. The reason they are in consideration is because of the hard work. You may feel the PEDs increased their numbers* but ignoring those numbers is ludicrous.

* This is questioned by many sources. If the effects of PEDs were well known it would be easy to regress players' numbers. Without solid evidence on the effects of PEDs one can’t unauthenticate the statistics except arbitrarily. But arbitrary denouncements are what we are trying to avoid.

The underlying issue seems almost personal. That underlying issue is so important that writers, seemingly, want to rewrite history.

So where do we look for an underlying issue.

Easy.

The Twilight Zone.

Based on a 1950 short story by Damon Knight, Rod Serling’s teleplay of To Serve Man described how Michael Chambers happened to be on a spaceship. Told in flashback form, the cryptographer talks about Kanamits' visit to Earth. To Serve Man models a history of writers and PEDs.

The Kanamits, nine-foot aliens that communicate telepathically, visit the Earth uninvited. They use the United Nations to assure that they come with good intentions. To prove this the Kanamits help end world hunger, provide a cheap energy source, render nuclear weapons harmless, help cure diseases, and help to bring world peace.

The Kanamits* did leave a book at the U.N., but given the difference in languages, only the title had been determined, To Serve Man. Despite government and military insistence to decrypt the entire book to find out the true intention of the aliens, many people including Chambers assume that Kanamits have the best moral intentions and soon start signing up to visit the Kanamits' home planet, touted as a paradise. People assumed that To Serve Man was a message about how they wished to serve mankind.

* Fun note: Richard Kiel played the Kanamit. Also Jaws in several James Bond films.

Only, when Chambers is boarding the spaceship to travel to the Kanamits’ home planet is it revealed that To Serve Man is a cookbook. By then, it is too late for Chambers, and he is soon forced to accept his fate of becoming an alien dinner.

Many quality points to learn from the story. I am going to focus on Chambers as today’s baseball writers who were writing during the PEDs era of baseball. Kanamits are home runs and fans are the masses of people either traveling unknowingly to become a Kanamitian dinner or left to face the future on Earth.

Michael Chambers had a simple, yet important job; using his cryptology skill to decipher To Serve Man. However, failing to question the actions of the Kanamits, he assumed their motives were good. They must be moral and humane, they want to serve mankind. Those who did question their motives were trivialized. Chambers went along for the ride. In the end his lack of critical thinking and questioning the motives affected not only him but all of mankind.

This is the situation with PEDs. We expected the writers to turn their critical eye to the game of baseball. The home runs were the Kanamits. We, as fans, expected the writers to let us know if something was wrong. If the reporters, in the clubhouse, were not questioning things, why should we? Writers treated the offensive explosion just as Chambers viewed his encrypted cookbook, with complacency.

{exp:list_maker}It is easy, in retrospect, to see the questions Chambers should have asked himself to motive himself to crack the book.
How can we put human values on aliens, including ones that communicate in a completely different way then we do?
The Kanamits went to great lengths to make sure that mankind was fed, healthy, and not killing each other. Why did we just assume that they had our best interest when they clearly went out of their way to visit us?
Why in the heck were they so concerned about the weight of people when they were loading the spaceship? Given the advanced language and technology they surely did not need this information for a technical reason.
{/exp:list_maker}

Clearly Chambers fell down on his job. When we comeback from the flashback we see the Kanamits encouraging him to eat, so we doesn’t lose weight, and Chambers slowly is resigned to his fate and eats.

Baseball writers, as the offense numbers started to rise, stopped critical thinking and went along for the ride. They lost the ability or desire to look for the reason behind the increase in offensive numbers. They were, quite simply, acting like Michael Chambers looking forward to a pleasant trip with the Kanamits to the benefit of themselves. They were not thinking that they were being misled when their job is, specifically, is not to be misled. The fans were falling in love with the home run and they went along with the ride.

It didn't end until Jose Canseco starting running around saying, ‘To Serve Man’ is a cookbook.

The writers are now Chambers sitting on a spaceship left to think about their own inaction each time a vote comes around. Instead of accepting their fate, as Chambers does when he starts to eat, they are insisting on blaming others. They blame the home runs and the players who hit them.

The Kanamits didn’t do anything but benefit from Chambers, and others, basically assuming that the Kanamits wanted to server mankind. PED users got by only because the writers lacked common sense. The Kanamits provided things which we can compare to the statistics generated during the PED era. Eliminating them is an attempt to retroactively change history to an image we desire.

The reporters need to follow Chambers' lead and resign themselves to a history they enabled. Not taking into account the relative value of the players in relation to the era they played in continues to harm the history of the game. This point is curiously ironic. Reporters will argue that Jack Morris belongs in the Hall of Fame since we was the best pitcher in the '80s. His numbers are lacking compared to pitchers who have been elected but he is worthy despite, well, being worthy.

If Jack Morris can be worthy despite his lack of credentials, how can other players with credentials be seen as unworthy because somebody cheated when they played*.

* Which should not be referred to as "The Jeff Bagwell" voter effect.

Most importantly, the writers will continue to discredit players like Barry Larkin by relegating their stories behind the controversy. That is just another shame they need to learn to deal with and correct.
Posted by: Mat Kovach

January 14, 2012

Is there an asterisk in Brandon’s future?

Doing a little research in preparation for doing the comments on San Francisco Giants players in this year's THT Forecasts (yes, Greg, I will make the deadline!), I stumbled across a nugget of very interesting trivia.

Brandon Belt put together the following batting line in his partial major league season with the Giants in 2011:

     G    PA    AB     R     H    2B    3B    HR   RBI    BB    SO    BA   OBP   SLG   OPS
    63   209   187    21    42     6     1     9    18    20    57  .225  .306  .412  .718

And another player in a partial major league season from many years ago put up this line:

     G    PA    AB     R     H    2B    3B    HR   RBI    BB    SO    BA   OBP   SLG   OPS
    51   202   182    26    41     5     1     9    27    17    33  .225  .287  .412  .699

Belt's was about as close to an exact replica of the earlier one as practically possible.

Do you know who that second player was?
Click for more...

Posted by: Steve Treder


Click here for more THT Notes.