![[Powered by Blogger]](http://buttons.blogger.com/bloggerbutton1.gif){kind=small}
Saturday, August 16, 2003
Posted
12:56 PM
by Sean
John Lackey stood on the Tigers' necks for eight innings last night before giving up a home run to Bobby Higginson to start the ninth. Lackey has struggled some this season - his first full season in the Majors - but it's encouraging to see him dominate a team, no matter how awful they happen to be.
The win is the Angels' third in a row, and fourth out of their last five. At this point, with forty games to play, they need:
5 wins to avoid a 100-loss season
10 wins to avoid matching their worst loss total (65-95 in 1980, 67-95 in 1968)
23 wins to finish at .500
Any combination of 16 Angels wins and Tigers losses to avoid finishing with the worst record in the AL
Any combination of 38 Angels wins and Rangers losses to avoid finishing last in the AL West
One step at a time. One step at a time.
John Lackey stood on the Tigers' necks for eight innings last night before giving up a home run to Bobby Higginson to start the ninth. Lackey has struggled some this season - his first full season in the Majors - but it's encouraging to see him dominate a team, no matter how awful they happen to be.
The win is the Angels' third in a row, and fourth out of their last five. At this point, with forty games to play, they need:
5 wins to avoid a 100-loss season
10 wins to avoid matching their worst loss total (65-95 in 1980, 67-95 in 1968)
23 wins to finish at .500
Any combination of 16 Angels wins and Tigers losses to avoid finishing with the worst record in the AL
Any combination of 38 Angels wins and Rangers losses to avoid finishing last in the AL West
One step at a time. One step at a time.
Friday, August 15, 2003
Posted
5:18 PM
by Sean
The Orange County Register is reporting that Glaus has a torn right rotator cuff and frayed right labrum, meaning that in all probability he's done for the year. Both he and Erstad should have whatever surgery they need as soon as possible, to ensure that they'll be healthy in time to start spring training next year.
And yes, for those of you who are wondering, I did see Rob Neyer's not terribly bright column blaming the Angels' woes this season on Darin Erstad. Or, actually, not quite; what he says is "...if you want to pinoint just one problem, it's obvious: Darin Erstad."
Now, Neyer has had a stick up his ass about Erstad for as long as I can remember, so it doesn't surprise me that he'd say something bad about him. What does surprise me - and it seems like Neyer's been doing this kind of thing a lot lately - is the sheer lack of sophistication on display. Looking at the Angels' season, why on God's green Earth would you pinpoint "just one problem?" There have been more than enough problems to account for a disappointing year, regardless of who was playing center field. Saying that Erstad is "the most to blame" is like saying that a guy who's been shot seventeen times actually died when he was hit by bullet number two. How is this Tinkertoy analysis worth a national audience?
And let's not forget that it's not Darin Erstad's performance in the field that's hurting the Angels - or, at least, not very much - because he hasn't actually been playing all that much. Assuming he doesn't return, he'll have finished the year with 258 ABs in 67 games. So here we have Rob Neyer taking the curious position that a team good enough to win the World Series became a subpar club largely due to a guy who didn't even play half of their games. How is that possible? Oh, it's his contract that's hurting the Angels, because they're paying him eight million a year and now can't afford to improve. But didn't this team just deliberately eat $15 million rather than keep Kevin Appier on the roster? Why, yes, Rob. They did do that. So maybe affordability isn't the question.
The cherry on top of the stupidity sundae, however, is this:
Got that? Neyer thinks that if one concedes that the Angels had to pay Erstad that money in order to win the World Series, even so it's still too high a price!. $32 million over four years? For a World Series? Go ask George Steinbrenner if that's too much to pay, Rob. Or any other owner, for that matter.
The Orange County Register is reporting that Glaus has a torn right rotator cuff and frayed right labrum, meaning that in all probability he's done for the year. Both he and Erstad should have whatever surgery they need as soon as possible, to ensure that they'll be healthy in time to start spring training next year.
And yes, for those of you who are wondering, I did see Rob Neyer's not terribly bright column blaming the Angels' woes this season on Darin Erstad. Or, actually, not quite; what he says is "...if you want to pinoint just one problem, it's obvious: Darin Erstad."
Now, Neyer has had a stick up his ass about Erstad for as long as I can remember, so it doesn't surprise me that he'd say something bad about him. What does surprise me - and it seems like Neyer's been doing this kind of thing a lot lately - is the sheer lack of sophistication on display. Looking at the Angels' season, why on God's green Earth would you pinpoint "just one problem?" There have been more than enough problems to account for a disappointing year, regardless of who was playing center field. Saying that Erstad is "the most to blame" is like saying that a guy who's been shot seventeen times actually died when he was hit by bullet number two. How is this Tinkertoy analysis worth a national audience?
And let's not forget that it's not Darin Erstad's performance in the field that's hurting the Angels - or, at least, not very much - because he hasn't actually been playing all that much. Assuming he doesn't return, he'll have finished the year with 258 ABs in 67 games. So here we have Rob Neyer taking the curious position that a team good enough to win the World Series became a subpar club largely due to a guy who didn't even play half of their games. How is that possible? Oh, it's his contract that's hurting the Angels, because they're paying him eight million a year and now can't afford to improve. But didn't this team just deliberately eat $15 million rather than keep Kevin Appier on the roster? Why, yes, Rob. They did do that. So maybe affordability isn't the question.
The cherry on top of the stupidity sundae, however, is this:
Maybe the Angels had to spend $32 million for the two-and-a-half months of Darin Erstad that helped them win the World Series.
But that seems to me like one hell of a price to pay.
Got that? Neyer thinks that if one concedes that the Angels had to pay Erstad that money in order to win the World Series, even so it's still too high a price!. $32 million over four years? For a World Series? Go ask George Steinbrenner if that's too much to pay, Rob. Or any other owner, for that matter.
Posted
11:50 AM
by Sean
Last night's victory over the Chicago White Sox marks not just the first time the Angels have won a series since the All-Star break, it's the first time they've won two in a row since July 12-13 versus Minnesota. You know, back when they were in contention. A month ago.
Clearly, the story of the night was Scot Shields and his 7.2 innings of four-hit, one-run pitching. Lord, the guy is such a breath of fresh air compared to the other starters on any given night. He throws strikes consistently, but has terrific movement on his fastball. Even when he's off the plate he's always near the strike zone. He's now made three starts since replacing Appier in the rotation, and each time has pitched well. I was encouraged to see Mike Scioscia quoted as saying "[H]e's got great stuff. We're going to see if he can maintain it."
With the win, the Angels need just six more victories to avoid a 100-loss season. Beginning tonight, they have a three-game series with the Tigers, who at this point might as well move to a town called "Hapless," inasmuch as that particular adjective seems to prefix their name pretty routinely these days. David Eckstein is expected to return to the lineup after missing a few games with hamstring tightness.
Last night's victory over the Chicago White Sox marks not just the first time the Angels have won a series since the All-Star break, it's the first time they've won two in a row since July 12-13 versus Minnesota. You know, back when they were in contention. A month ago.
Clearly, the story of the night was Scot Shields and his 7.2 innings of four-hit, one-run pitching. Lord, the guy is such a breath of fresh air compared to the other starters on any given night. He throws strikes consistently, but has terrific movement on his fastball. Even when he's off the plate he's always near the strike zone. He's now made three starts since replacing Appier in the rotation, and each time has pitched well. I was encouraged to see Mike Scioscia quoted as saying "[H]e's got great stuff. We're going to see if he can maintain it."
With the win, the Angels need just six more victories to avoid a 100-loss season. Beginning tonight, they have a three-game series with the Tigers, who at this point might as well move to a town called "Hapless," inasmuch as that particular adjective seems to prefix their name pretty routinely these days. David Eckstein is expected to return to the lineup after missing a few games with hamstring tightness.
Wednesday, August 13, 2003
Posted
5:39 PM
by Sean
By now, you've probably heard that Derek Zumsteg and Will Carroll at Baseball Prospectus have broken a story that Bud Selig intends to reinstate Pete Rose - technically, take him off the ineligible list - after this year's World Series. Rose would be eligible to hold any position in Major League Baseball except manager in 2004, but would be allowed to manage beginning in 2005. In return, Zumsteg and Carroll say, Rose will not be required to admit that he bet on baseball. In fact, Rose doesn't seem to be required to do much of anything; the agreement (which, they say, is in written form already and has been since last November) is essentially a complete capitulation to Rose.
Rob Neyer argues fairly convincingly that Rose will ultimately have to admit betting on baseball. There's simply too large, and too powerful, a group of people out there who think that contrition is a necessary precursor to forgiveness. But clearly that's a huge step for Rose, and not just because of his ego - remember, no official finding was ever made on whether Rose bet on baseball; he's on the ineligble list not for gambling but for engaging in acts that are detrimental to baseball. An actual admission that he did place wagers on MLB games during his playing and/or managing career gives MLB an ironclad reason to ban him permanently. And just saying that he's willing to admit it in the context of making a deal with Selig places Rose in a position of having to trust the Commissioner not to say "Aha! So you did bet on baseball!" Would that stand up in court? Of course not. But it's got to have occurred to Pete Rose, who probably is fairly paranoid about that kind of thing by this point. Which is why I think there may not be an actual, signed deal right now, and there may not be until the very end. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that Rose will go into a room this November, sign a statement admitting that he bet on baseball, and simultaneously exchange that paper with the Commissioner for a copy of his reinstatement.
By now, you've probably heard that Derek Zumsteg and Will Carroll at Baseball Prospectus have broken a story that Bud Selig intends to reinstate Pete Rose - technically, take him off the ineligible list - after this year's World Series. Rose would be eligible to hold any position in Major League Baseball except manager in 2004, but would be allowed to manage beginning in 2005. In return, Zumsteg and Carroll say, Rose will not be required to admit that he bet on baseball. In fact, Rose doesn't seem to be required to do much of anything; the agreement (which, they say, is in written form already and has been since last November) is essentially a complete capitulation to Rose.
Rob Neyer argues fairly convincingly that Rose will ultimately have to admit betting on baseball. There's simply too large, and too powerful, a group of people out there who think that contrition is a necessary precursor to forgiveness. But clearly that's a huge step for Rose, and not just because of his ego - remember, no official finding was ever made on whether Rose bet on baseball; he's on the ineligble list not for gambling but for engaging in acts that are detrimental to baseball. An actual admission that he did place wagers on MLB games during his playing and/or managing career gives MLB an ironclad reason to ban him permanently. And just saying that he's willing to admit it in the context of making a deal with Selig places Rose in a position of having to trust the Commissioner not to say "Aha! So you did bet on baseball!" Would that stand up in court? Of course not. But it's got to have occurred to Pete Rose, who probably is fairly paranoid about that kind of thing by this point. Which is why I think there may not be an actual, signed deal right now, and there may not be until the very end. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that Rose will go into a room this November, sign a statement admitting that he bet on baseball, and simultaneously exchange that paper with the Commissioner for a copy of his reinstatement.
Posted
5:21 PM
by Sean
Oh, and the Angels need eight more wins to avoid a (first-ever, kind of surprisingly) 100-loss season. The good news is that they still have games with Detroit, and the Tigers need eleven wins to avoid a 120-loss season. Ye gods.
Oh, and the Angels need eight more wins to avoid a (first-ever, kind of surprisingly) 100-loss season. The good news is that they still have games with Detroit, and the Tigers need eleven wins to avoid a 120-loss season. Ye gods.
Posted
3:08 PM
by Sean
Must...post...must...ignore...pain...
So the Angels lost again last night, 10-4, following yet another crappy start from Ramon Ortiz, who has gone from gifted but erratic to just plain bad in the course of the last few weeks. That makes 64 losses for the season, one more than they had in all of 2002, with 43 left to play. They're 6-21 since the All-Star Break, Darin Erstad is on the disabled list and may be out for the season, Glaus had a setback during his rehab assignment and won't play for several more days, Eckstein has a strained hamstring, Percival very nearly blew a six run lead the other night, and Bengie Molina, God bless him, seems to spend more time clutching various body parts in pain than he does actually catching the baseball (that's not Bengie's fault, but it seems emblematic of the season).
Whee.
The Angels are in a bind. Obviously, 2003 is over for them, but they're still looking to capitalize on 2002, and cement relationships with the new fans they made last year. So Moreno, Stoneman, and even Scioscia continue to pay lip service to the idea that they can compete this year, when the reality is that the next couple of months are going to be an extended preview of some of the excellent prospects that have made their way through the Angels' farm system.
The funny thing is, though, that given the number of injuries the Angels have suffered, there's absolutely no practical difference at this point between "playing to win" and looking ahead to 2004. It's not like Chone Figgins, Robb Quinlan, et al. have been brought up to help Sciosica decide which will make the team next year, they're up because someone has to fill those roster spots. And the guys who are playing well at triple-A are the guys who would be promoted regardless of whether it's to help the current team or to audition for a 2004 slot.
Must...post...must...ignore...pain...
So the Angels lost again last night, 10-4, following yet another crappy start from Ramon Ortiz, who has gone from gifted but erratic to just plain bad in the course of the last few weeks. That makes 64 losses for the season, one more than they had in all of 2002, with 43 left to play. They're 6-21 since the All-Star Break, Darin Erstad is on the disabled list and may be out for the season, Glaus had a setback during his rehab assignment and won't play for several more days, Eckstein has a strained hamstring, Percival very nearly blew a six run lead the other night, and Bengie Molina, God bless him, seems to spend more time clutching various body parts in pain than he does actually catching the baseball (that's not Bengie's fault, but it seems emblematic of the season).
Whee.
The Angels are in a bind. Obviously, 2003 is over for them, but they're still looking to capitalize on 2002, and cement relationships with the new fans they made last year. So Moreno, Stoneman, and even Scioscia continue to pay lip service to the idea that they can compete this year, when the reality is that the next couple of months are going to be an extended preview of some of the excellent prospects that have made their way through the Angels' farm system.
The funny thing is, though, that given the number of injuries the Angels have suffered, there's absolutely no practical difference at this point between "playing to win" and looking ahead to 2004. It's not like Chone Figgins, Robb Quinlan, et al. have been brought up to help Sciosica decide which will make the team next year, they're up because someone has to fill those roster spots. And the guys who are playing well at triple-A are the guys who would be promoted regardless of whether it's to help the current team or to audition for a 2004 slot.