Good news for the Phillies this past week, as they took two games apiece from the two best teams the NL Central has to offer - the Cardinals and the Cubs. This, after starting July by ripping the reeling Mets, taking three of four from Cincinnati, pummeling the triple A Pirates and throwing the Marlins back to sea. Oh, and they also scored a win against the hapless and Jake Peavy-full (how ya likin' Philadelphia now?) Padres.
Prior to the Cubs and St. Louis wins, Philadelphia sports radio and my fellow fans were quick to tell me that the Phils weren't beating anybody and haven't really been tested yet. So they go out and clobber the Cubs 10-1 behind a strong 6-inning outing from Rodrigo Lopez, who is 3-0 with a 2.60 ERA, but more importantly than that, is enjoying a ridiculous amount of run support. Including the 14-6 pasting of the not-as-impressive-as-I-was-told-they-were Cardinals, Lopez has enjoyed a 31-9 edge in runs scored in his three wins.
The guy who is quickly becoming my favorite Phils pitcher, Joe Blanton, pitched 7 innings of 1-run baseball against the Cubs in a game the Phils eventually won in 13 innings on a Jayson Werth 3-run walk-off homer. He then followed this up with an 8-inning gem against the Cardinals (limiting the 3-4-5 hitters to 2-for-10 in the game), scattering seven hits and surrendering only two earned runs. Blanton's last four outings have all been at least seven innings, and have resulted in three wins, four earned runs and much-needed relief for a well used Phillies bullpen.
Unfortunately, Jamie Moyer has not fared as well. His last four starts have been uneven to say the least. He's 3-1 over that span, but he surrendered 1, 6, 0 and 4 earned runs and 22 hits in those games. His ERA is well north of five and he is routinely only getting five or six innings into games. He pitches tomorrow against the Diamondbacks, so we'll see where he is after that. If the every other game thing holds, he should throw a good game.
Cole Hamels is the most disconcerting pitcher on the Phils staff. He, Like Moyer, has been up and down and all over the place. He's 2-1 over the past five games, but he's been so inconsistent, it's hard to imagine he's the Phillies ace pitcher. His ERA has been dropping lately, and he's on the good side of a Moyer-like every other game rhythm, so I am hoping to see something more like 2008 Hamels and less like the 2009 edition.
And finally, no discussion of Phillies pitching would be complete without a mention of J.A. Happ. Here's a guy who is 7-1 and gets no respect from the Philly radio stations. Would-be sports talk show host Mike Missanelli has dismissed Happ, saying that he hasn't beaten anybody. Whatever - Happ has pitched well in July, Earning two wins and having pitched well enough in two other games to have earned two more wins (3 and 2 earned runs, both in seven innings of work).
Why All The Talk About Phillies Pitching?
Roy Halladay, of course. It's plain to even the most ardent Phillies fan that they could surely use a legit #1 starting pitcher like Halladay. Unfortunately, the Blue Jays have rejected a 4-for-1 offer from the Phils that included Happ and prospects Michael Taylor, Carlos Carrasco and Jason Donald. Even though I would prefer that the Phillies not let Happ go, it would be foolish to not make an offer. I'm also leery of an offer that would include both Kyle Drabek and Happ, so I am glad that the Phils also seem unwilling to part with both.
Like a lot of Phillies fans, the aforementioned Missanelli dismisses any and all talk that does not result in Halladay coming to Philadelphia. It seems that he'd be fine with giving Toronto Happ, Drabek, Taylor, Carrasco and Donald. I am not so comfortable with that. But maybe I shouldn't be so worried. The Phils have a deep farm system now, and they've drafted fairly well in recent times. Perhaps they could make this trade, go for that 2nd consecutive World Series win and everybody would love them for making such a bold move. Halladay in Philly. Sounds great - but is it too high a cost? I'm glad I don't have to make this call.
The Sad Truth In Philadelphia
Mike Missanelli is the #1 sports radio show host for the evening drive time in Philly. To fully appreciate how sad this truly is, you'd need to understand how bad his competition, Howard Eskin, is. Eskin's had it pretty good in Philly for quite some time, being the default sports personality in this town. It's pretty sad, because he's as lame, if not lamer, than Missanelli. Anyone who wonders why Philly fans can sometimes be so aggressive, moody and somewhat belligerent need look no further than the state of Philly sports radio to know why that is. And don't even get me started about Angelo Cataldi and how sad and annoying his mind-numbing morning show is. Take my word for it...it's bad.
Why Bother Doing A Proper Representation?
Really - why bother with facts when you can just generalize and make up crap? This, apparently, is the approach that Philadelphia Daily News columnist Stu Bykofsky took for his July 23rd 'column'. It includes such 'factual' and 'professional' content as " I DON'T have a blog. If I did blog, this is what it would be like. (To make it seem like a real blog, I'll include typos and factual errors.) " I guess I shouldn't be surprised that unwarranted attacks on blogs would continue as newspapers shut down and readership drops. Seriously, why would I think that a guy who's been a columnist for 22 years would bother with professionalism? Stupid generalizations are so much easier to write. IMHO.
Resources: ESPN and philly.com
Monday, July 27, 2009
Friday, July 24, 2009
Manny's Grand Slam - Greatest Moment In Dodger History?
Maybe I should just stop listening to Mike & Mike In The Morning. I often find myself talking to my radio at some of the dumb things that Mike Greenberg says. And I've been talking to my radio a lot lately.
Yesterday, he went on a rant because of something a reporter (they said his name, but I am sorry to have to report that I do not remember what it was. I was in my car, and, really, it's immaterial for this article) said when talking to Manny Ramirez.
As you may have heard, Manny hit a pinch hit grand slam on Wednesday night.
Regarding Greenie's take though, please bear with me while I set the table. He was all tsk tsk before he told this story. He made it out to be this big, big deal. About how broadcasters have to be very careful with what they say, and how sometimes things will be said near an open mic that maybe would not have been said had said person known that mic was open. Regrettable things.
Then he told the story. And any of you who also listen to Mike & Mike can probably understand what I mean when I add that Greenie often blows things up to ridiculously extraordinary levels - like his station breaks. "Something happened in baseball yesterday that had never happened before. And I'll tell you about it after this..." Cut to commercial.
Then he'll come back and tell you that Yankees hat wearing Jack Nicholson was in the crowd in Chicago. Really riveting stuff comes after these station breaks, believe you me.
So back to the story. If you didn't hear it - and now I'm dragging it out - perhaps you're wondering what was said that shouldn't have been said? Like me, you probably think it's some insult or some snide remark about a colleague.
Ready? The interviewer proclaimed Manny's homer to be "one of the greatest moments in Dodgers history" or something very much along those lines.
Yes, that's it. I sure was expecting something else. But that's what it was. Hardly regrettable in a "job threatening" or "take out to the woodshed" way. Overstating things, perhaps, but hardly regrettable.
Then Greenberg and Mike Golic went into a mocking discussion of where this really ranks in Dodger lore, snidely putting it at number 600.
I agree that it wasn't one of the great moments in Dodger history. My objection here is the length of time Greenie dedicated to this non-story and the intensity he dispatched to poo poo the reporter.
As if Greenie himself is devoid of needless hyperbole. As if many many other reporters/interviewers are not given to the occasional hyperbolic nonsense.
And to top things off, I found a Bill Plaschke column from the LA Times that ranks this homer 3rd in Dodger history.
Behind Steve Finley's game-winning grand slam in 2004 that vauted the Dodgers to the postseason. It was a 9th inning blast, so that drama and the importance of the homer can't be missed.
Behind Kirk Gibson's overdone blast off Dennis Eckersley in the 1988 World Series. And before anyone flips out about this characterization, I say it's overdone, not overrated. Although I think it's overrated as well. I'm just tired of hearing about it. It gets so much press and I've heard the call so many times I think it's burned into my brain cells. I can believe that I saw it, why can't the guy who called the game??
So if Bill Plaschke, who is frequently cited (and fawned upon) by Mike Greenberg on his show, says that the homer is that important, who am I to question it?
I am far from innocent of blathering on with hyperbole dripping down my proverbial chin.
Who is Greenberg to question what an interviewer says on the field, in the moment, with fans screaming, after a game in which a fan favorite player hit a bomb in a noteworthy situation?
Does Greenberg know what he sounds like after he speaks with Peter Gammons, Buster Olney, Jayson Stark and Bill Curry? You'd think a proposal was forthcoming. Greenie fawns and deposits hyperbole about these men being "the best at what you do" with the best of them. It's pretty revolting most times.
Let he who is bereft of hyperbole cast the first critical stone.
Yesterday, he went on a rant because of something a reporter (they said his name, but I am sorry to have to report that I do not remember what it was. I was in my car, and, really, it's immaterial for this article) said when talking to Manny Ramirez.
As you may have heard, Manny hit a pinch hit grand slam on Wednesday night.
Regarding Greenie's take though, please bear with me while I set the table. He was all tsk tsk before he told this story. He made it out to be this big, big deal. About how broadcasters have to be very careful with what they say, and how sometimes things will be said near an open mic that maybe would not have been said had said person known that mic was open. Regrettable things.
Then he told the story. And any of you who also listen to Mike & Mike can probably understand what I mean when I add that Greenie often blows things up to ridiculously extraordinary levels - like his station breaks. "Something happened in baseball yesterday that had never happened before. And I'll tell you about it after this..." Cut to commercial.
Then he'll come back and tell you that Yankees hat wearing Jack Nicholson was in the crowd in Chicago. Really riveting stuff comes after these station breaks, believe you me.
So back to the story. If you didn't hear it - and now I'm dragging it out - perhaps you're wondering what was said that shouldn't have been said? Like me, you probably think it's some insult or some snide remark about a colleague.
Ready? The interviewer proclaimed Manny's homer to be "one of the greatest moments in Dodgers history" or something very much along those lines.
Yes, that's it. I sure was expecting something else. But that's what it was. Hardly regrettable in a "job threatening" or "take out to the woodshed" way. Overstating things, perhaps, but hardly regrettable.
Then Greenberg and Mike Golic went into a mocking discussion of where this really ranks in Dodger lore, snidely putting it at number 600.
I agree that it wasn't one of the great moments in Dodger history. My objection here is the length of time Greenie dedicated to this non-story and the intensity he dispatched to poo poo the reporter.
As if Greenie himself is devoid of needless hyperbole. As if many many other reporters/interviewers are not given to the occasional hyperbolic nonsense.
And to top things off, I found a Bill Plaschke column from the LA Times that ranks this homer 3rd in Dodger history.
Behind Steve Finley's game-winning grand slam in 2004 that vauted the Dodgers to the postseason. It was a 9th inning blast, so that drama and the importance of the homer can't be missed.
Behind Kirk Gibson's overdone blast off Dennis Eckersley in the 1988 World Series. And before anyone flips out about this characterization, I say it's overdone, not overrated. Although I think it's overrated as well. I'm just tired of hearing about it. It gets so much press and I've heard the call so many times I think it's burned into my brain cells. I can believe that I saw it, why can't the guy who called the game??
So if Bill Plaschke, who is frequently cited (and fawned upon) by Mike Greenberg on his show, says that the homer is that important, who am I to question it?
I am far from innocent of blathering on with hyperbole dripping down my proverbial chin.
Who is Greenberg to question what an interviewer says on the field, in the moment, with fans screaming, after a game in which a fan favorite player hit a bomb in a noteworthy situation?
Does Greenberg know what he sounds like after he speaks with Peter Gammons, Buster Olney, Jayson Stark and Bill Curry? You'd think a proposal was forthcoming. Greenie fawns and deposits hyperbole about these men being "the best at what you do" with the best of them. It's pretty revolting most times.
Let he who is bereft of hyperbole cast the first critical stone.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Roger Goodell And Michael Vick: Together Again?
All right, so Michael Vick has served his time and paid his debt to society. So now it's just a matter of time before he signs with an NFL club, right?
Not so fast. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has determined that now that the legal part of Vick's woes have reached an end, it's the NFL's turn to pronounce a judgment.
Mike & Mike In The Morning had former MLB Commissioner Fay Vincent on this morning. Vincent said something along the lines of why should the NFL punish Vick any further than the law already has? The judge handed down a sentence, Vick served it, and in the eyes of the law, he's served his time.
I will freely admit that I have wavered on Vick quite a bit, unable to decide if I felt that Vick should be allowed to play or not. I think I am now leaning toward the idea that he should be allowed to - if he can.
There are a bunch of NFL teams that could use a quarterback, even one as raw as Michael Vick. He was an exciting and talented player, no doubt, but I don't think he would be mistaken for a traditional, pocket passing, ball control quarterback.
And that's fine. His style of play was good enough to land the Falcons in the playoffs and to score impressive wins in 2002 (27-7 over the Packers) and 2004 (47-17 over the Rams). I may be going out on a limb here, but I suspect that the Falcons could not have won those games, let alone been there to even play them, without Michael Vick.
So give him a shot. Training camps start soon, he'd be able to get himself in there and try out for a team. He'd have to deal with whatever controversy follows him, but I feel he should be given a shot.
Do I condone his actions? Of course not. Neither did the judge who presided over his trial. But that judge assigned a punishment, and now that punishment is finished. It seems that this action might not be good enough for Goodell.
And I can see his point. The NFL is a business after all, and it's in Goodell's (and the team owners) best interest to eliminate any potential PR problems, be they past, current or potential. There's no getting around the fact that Vick is now a 'controversial' figure.
Goodell wants him to demonstrate that he has reformed himself and that he can and will be a productive member of society. In the interest of protecting the multi-billion dollar entity that is the NFL, Goodell's thinking here makes lots of sense.
But if Vick has been punished by the law, while he is hardly innocent, he is, theoretically, available to rejoin the workforce. And his profession happens to be football player. Despite my personal feelings about what he did, I think the NFL should back off and see what happens.
This isn't like other situations that Goodell has had to preside over. This case actually has an ending. Vick was convicted, sent to prison and released. If Vick does something dumb and gets himself in trouble in the ensuing weeks, then Goodell can pounce, and he'd be in the right. He is correct that the NFL brand is a very valuable one, and one that cannot afford to be tarnished by the players that are the most visible face of that brand.
Personally, I think Vick should seek out other options. The CFL or the UFL would certainly be interested in having an exciting, talented player like Vick in their midst. The CFL offers distance. The UFL offers newness, a lack of the bright spotlight that is constantly on the NFL, and most importantly, the need for a splash.
I think that Vick and the UFL would be a good fit. They have some good, experienced former NFL coaches there (Jim Fassel, Dennis Green, Jim Haslett and Ted Cottrell), any of which would surely be able to deal with Vick's notoriety.
The other great thing the UFL would offer is a chance at redemption. Vick could ply his trade, earn money to pay off debts and possibly work out any issues that might be plaguing him. If all goes well, he could spend two or three years there, and then look to the NFL again.
It's a shame that ESPN has reported that Vick has little interest in either of these two leagues. If Vick did go to either league and was a model citizen and demonstrated "genuine remorse" (I find this notion of Goodell's distasteful), I think Goodell would be more than willing to listen.
After all, if Vick does well, and becomes the crowd pleaser he once was, the dollars will follow. And I can't imagine that there is any dollar that Goodell would allow to escape the NFL's coffers.
Resources: Mike & Mike In The Morning, Pro Football Reference and the article "For Vick, Freedom Rekindles Debate; Return to the NFL Remains a Question" from the July 21 Washington Post.
Not so fast. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has determined that now that the legal part of Vick's woes have reached an end, it's the NFL's turn to pronounce a judgment.
Mike & Mike In The Morning had former MLB Commissioner Fay Vincent on this morning. Vincent said something along the lines of why should the NFL punish Vick any further than the law already has? The judge handed down a sentence, Vick served it, and in the eyes of the law, he's served his time.
I will freely admit that I have wavered on Vick quite a bit, unable to decide if I felt that Vick should be allowed to play or not. I think I am now leaning toward the idea that he should be allowed to - if he can.
There are a bunch of NFL teams that could use a quarterback, even one as raw as Michael Vick. He was an exciting and talented player, no doubt, but I don't think he would be mistaken for a traditional, pocket passing, ball control quarterback.
And that's fine. His style of play was good enough to land the Falcons in the playoffs and to score impressive wins in 2002 (27-7 over the Packers) and 2004 (47-17 over the Rams). I may be going out on a limb here, but I suspect that the Falcons could not have won those games, let alone been there to even play them, without Michael Vick.
So give him a shot. Training camps start soon, he'd be able to get himself in there and try out for a team. He'd have to deal with whatever controversy follows him, but I feel he should be given a shot.
Do I condone his actions? Of course not. Neither did the judge who presided over his trial. But that judge assigned a punishment, and now that punishment is finished. It seems that this action might not be good enough for Goodell.
And I can see his point. The NFL is a business after all, and it's in Goodell's (and the team owners) best interest to eliminate any potential PR problems, be they past, current or potential. There's no getting around the fact that Vick is now a 'controversial' figure.
Goodell wants him to demonstrate that he has reformed himself and that he can and will be a productive member of society. In the interest of protecting the multi-billion dollar entity that is the NFL, Goodell's thinking here makes lots of sense.
But if Vick has been punished by the law, while he is hardly innocent, he is, theoretically, available to rejoin the workforce. And his profession happens to be football player. Despite my personal feelings about what he did, I think the NFL should back off and see what happens.
This isn't like other situations that Goodell has had to preside over. This case actually has an ending. Vick was convicted, sent to prison and released. If Vick does something dumb and gets himself in trouble in the ensuing weeks, then Goodell can pounce, and he'd be in the right. He is correct that the NFL brand is a very valuable one, and one that cannot afford to be tarnished by the players that are the most visible face of that brand.
Personally, I think Vick should seek out other options. The CFL or the UFL would certainly be interested in having an exciting, talented player like Vick in their midst. The CFL offers distance. The UFL offers newness, a lack of the bright spotlight that is constantly on the NFL, and most importantly, the need for a splash.
I think that Vick and the UFL would be a good fit. They have some good, experienced former NFL coaches there (Jim Fassel, Dennis Green, Jim Haslett and Ted Cottrell), any of which would surely be able to deal with Vick's notoriety.
The other great thing the UFL would offer is a chance at redemption. Vick could ply his trade, earn money to pay off debts and possibly work out any issues that might be plaguing him. If all goes well, he could spend two or three years there, and then look to the NFL again.
It's a shame that ESPN has reported that Vick has little interest in either of these two leagues. If Vick did go to either league and was a model citizen and demonstrated "genuine remorse" (I find this notion of Goodell's distasteful), I think Goodell would be more than willing to listen.
After all, if Vick does well, and becomes the crowd pleaser he once was, the dollars will follow. And I can't imagine that there is any dollar that Goodell would allow to escape the NFL's coffers.
Resources: Mike & Mike In The Morning, Pro Football Reference and the article "For Vick, Freedom Rekindles Debate; Return to the NFL Remains a Question" from the July 21 Washington Post.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Some Old School Reflections on Joe Mauer's .400 Chase
What do Rod Carew, George Brett, Tony Gwynn and Joe Mauer Have in Common?
Doesn't seem like anything, does it? All four have five letters in their last names. Three of four are American Leaguers. And four out of five dentists would recommend them as your team's leadoff hitter.
No, up until Mauer went 0-for-9 in his last at-bats before the All-Star break, lowering his average from .388 to .373, they all had the real possibility of being the first player since the great Ted Williams to hit .400.
I think this is one of those baseball achievements that will never happen again, and I have had lots of thoughts on this over the years, some of them rational, some of them lucid.
Rod Carew
Left: Rod Carew's 1977 Topps Baseball Card
I'm a little too young to really remember Rod Carew's attempt to hit .400. I mostly remember it from reading about it on baseball cards and in the Scholastic Baseball All-Star books I would get in school.
I wonder if others remember doing this? In school, they'd give you this form to fill out that offered all sorts of books. I'd always go for the Dynamite Magazines, any maze or puzzle book and any baseball or football book. Between these books and Baseball Digest I thought knew Carew's 1977 season inside and out.
Here's some stuff I didn't know - It's amazing. Carew started 'slow', finishing April at .356 and May at .365. Not that these are not great batting averages, but they don't really hint that someone was flirting with .400.
Left: All-Pro Baseball Stars 1978 - An excellent baseball reference in the pre-internet era
In fact, he didn't even reach .400 until June 26th, when he went 4-for-5 against the White Sox to push his average from .396 to .403. Then he moved up to his highest average of .411 on June 29th, maintained that for one more day, then staying on the plus side of .400 until gradually fading back below, to .398 on July 11th.
He wouldn't see .400 again that season, and in fact, dipped to .374 on August 25th. But then he rallied, raising his average steadily until he settled on .388 with a 3-for-4 performance on the final day of the season.
George Brett
As a kid, I always took it away from Brett, because in my mind, he didn't have as 'complete' a season as Carew. To me, Brett's .390 wasn't as legitimate as Carew's .388. I mean - 239 hits to 175 hits? 616 At bats to 449 at bats? Does 449 at bats even qualify you for a batting title? I believe that 500 plate appearances does...
The image to the left is George Brett's page inside the 1981 All-Pro Baseball Stars book.
But I came to realize that Brett's .390 was a lot more legitimate than I'd given him credit for. For one thing, he triumphed over 'roids (hemorrhoids, of course. Yes, I am totally juvenile) to have this great achievement, and also, I saw the numbers of Williams' incredible 1941 season:
But what I didn't notice until now is the amazing number of walks Williams had. I zeroed in on the hits - 185 to 175 - clearly, I had it wrong about the legitimacy of Brett's .390. Now that I see the walks, I think maybe I was right... :-)
George Brett's 1980 Topps Baseball Card
Like Carew, George Brett's 1980 season didn't start particularly well. He didn't hit .300 until achieving a .301 batting average on May 31st. Then he played in only 9 games in June, but was able to raise his average to a more George Brett like .337 before missing time from June 10th to July 10th.
During July, he steadily increased his average (with some dips as well), ending the month strong with a fantastic 8-for-10 hitting show against the Red Sox that pushed his average up to .390, 59 points higher than the .341 he was hitting after going 2-for-2 upon his July 10 return to the lineup.
After dipping a bit in early August, Brett again started to increase his average, until he hit .394 after goin 3-for-4 against Toronto on August 16th. The next day, a 4-for-4 performance pushed him above .400 for the first time that season, as his average settled in at .401.
He topped out at .406 four days later, then saw a decline, and his average slipped to .399. But not for long, as four days later, on August 26th, he'd reach his season high, .407. This time he managed to stay above .400 for nine more games, and then re-entered the sub-.400 realm. He'd hit .400 one more time on September 19th, and then that was it for the .400 chase. But not a bad run at all - having a .400 average as late as September 19 (with 13 games remaining in the season) is awesome.
Tony Gwynn
Then along comes Tony Gwynn, who, along with Wade Boggs, had pretty much set the standard for batting titles in the 1980s, winning four titles in the 80s and four more (four consecutive) in the 90s.
If my pre-teen self had seen this, it would have been 'not legit' all over again, baseball strike be damned.
Unlike Carew and Brett, Gwynn started strong, fashoning a .395 average by the end of April. It's hard to say whether or not Gwynn's foray into .400 was legitimate. It happened so early in the season - .402 on May 2nd, which was 33 hits in 82 at-bats. I'm thinking this is not enough of a season to say that a batter truly flirted with .400.
His last dip into the .400 waters came on May 15th, when he was batting .408 - 49-for-120. I am also noticing the wild fluctuation in his average at this time - .419 the day before, .398 the day after - based on this, I think this is more indicative of the kind of ups and downs seen in the early parts of a season.
That said, I am hardly downplaying Gwynn's spectacular batting prowess. He dodged, dipped, ducked, dived and dodged between .376 and .394 for the remainder of the season. It's amazing to have that type of consistency from a .294 hitter, let alone someone who is on the verge of .400.
Unfortunately, the big question when it comes to Tony Gwynn will remain unanswered forever: could he have hit .400 if the 1994 strike hadn't ended the season two months early? While I think that Gwynn was, perhaps, the best pure hitter of the 90s, I don't think he would have hit .400 for the season. No reason here, just what I think.
And then again, perhaps he could have. If I consider that Brett didn't top .400 until mid-August and Carew didn't get to .400 until June and had his last .400 day in mid-July, maybe. Sadly, it's all left to speculation now. I will say that if I thought anyone could have hit .400 at that time, Tony Gwynn would have been the guy on whom I'd have put my money.
Joe Mauer
Like Brett, Mauer has missed a significant amount of time in the season in which he chased/is chasing .400. He missed all of April (22 games), and a few other games here and there. He did finish May strongly, attaining a .414 batting average on the strength of a 41-for-99 performance.
He stayed above .400 for a good part of June, holding on with a .407 average as of June 21st. But then his average saw a steady decline until he ended June with a .383 average. Not bad at all, but he's going the wrong way where .400 is concerned. As for July, he pushed his average back into the .390s, only to see that average dip, before bottoming out at .373 after an 0-for-9 drought in his last two games before the All-Star game.
Mauer still has 73 games to ply his trade, and I, for one, will be interested to see how he does coming away from the All-Star game. Even if he doesn't hit .400 this year, the fact that he was as close as he was, and the fact that he was hitting over .400 well into June is an endorsement of his belonging in the conversation with the four other great hitters mentioned earlier.
Again - as with Gwynn - the question: Can he hit .400? And again - as with Gwynn - I don't feel that he can. I'd love to see someone hit for that lofty an average again. And Mauer has already spent some quality time north of the Williams line this season. But I'll be watching the box scores to see how he does. And I'll be rooting for him.
A Comparison of the seasons
Resources: Baseball Reference, of course.
Doesn't seem like anything, does it? All four have five letters in their last names. Three of four are American Leaguers. And four out of five dentists would recommend them as your team's leadoff hitter.
No, up until Mauer went 0-for-9 in his last at-bats before the All-Star break, lowering his average from .388 to .373, they all had the real possibility of being the first player since the great Ted Williams to hit .400.
I think this is one of those baseball achievements that will never happen again, and I have had lots of thoughts on this over the years, some of them rational, some of them lucid.
Rod Carew
Left: Rod Carew's 1977 Topps Baseball Card
I'm a little too young to really remember Rod Carew's attempt to hit .400. I mostly remember it from reading about it on baseball cards and in the Scholastic Baseball All-Star books I would get in school.
I wonder if others remember doing this? In school, they'd give you this form to fill out that offered all sorts of books. I'd always go for the Dynamite Magazines, any maze or puzzle book and any baseball or football book. Between these books and Baseball Digest I thought knew Carew's 1977 season inside and out.
Here's some stuff I didn't know - It's amazing. Carew started 'slow', finishing April at .356 and May at .365. Not that these are not great batting averages, but they don't really hint that someone was flirting with .400.
Player Year G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA
Carew 1977 155 694 616 128 239 38 16 14 100 23 13 69 55 .388
Left: All-Pro Baseball Stars 1978 - An excellent baseball reference in the pre-internet era
In fact, he didn't even reach .400 until June 26th, when he went 4-for-5 against the White Sox to push his average from .396 to .403. Then he moved up to his highest average of .411 on June 29th, maintained that for one more day, then staying on the plus side of .400 until gradually fading back below, to .398 on July 11th.
He wouldn't see .400 again that season, and in fact, dipped to .374 on August 25th. But then he rallied, raising his average steadily until he settled on .388 with a 3-for-4 performance on the final day of the season.
George Brett
As a kid, I always took it away from Brett, because in my mind, he didn't have as 'complete' a season as Carew. To me, Brett's .390 wasn't as legitimate as Carew's .388. I mean - 239 hits to 175 hits? 616 At bats to 449 at bats? Does 449 at bats even qualify you for a batting title? I believe that 500 plate appearances does...
Player Year G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA
Brett 1980 117 515 449 87 175 33 9 24 118 15 6 58 22 .390
The image to the left is George Brett's page inside the 1981 All-Pro Baseball Stars book.
But I came to realize that Brett's .390 was a lot more legitimate than I'd given him credit for. For one thing, he triumphed over 'roids (hemorrhoids, of course. Yes, I am totally juvenile) to have this great achievement, and also, I saw the numbers of Williams' incredible 1941 season:
Player Year G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA
Williams 1941 143 606 456 135 185 33 3 37 120 2 4 147 27 .406
But what I didn't notice until now is the amazing number of walks Williams had. I zeroed in on the hits - 185 to 175 - clearly, I had it wrong about the legitimacy of Brett's .390. Now that I see the walks, I think maybe I was right... :-)
George Brett's 1980 Topps Baseball Card
Like Carew, George Brett's 1980 season didn't start particularly well. He didn't hit .300 until achieving a .301 batting average on May 31st. Then he played in only 9 games in June, but was able to raise his average to a more George Brett like .337 before missing time from June 10th to July 10th.
During July, he steadily increased his average (with some dips as well), ending the month strong with a fantastic 8-for-10 hitting show against the Red Sox that pushed his average up to .390, 59 points higher than the .341 he was hitting after going 2-for-2 upon his July 10 return to the lineup.
After dipping a bit in early August, Brett again started to increase his average, until he hit .394 after goin 3-for-4 against Toronto on August 16th. The next day, a 4-for-4 performance pushed him above .400 for the first time that season, as his average settled in at .401.
He topped out at .406 four days later, then saw a decline, and his average slipped to .399. But not for long, as four days later, on August 26th, he'd reach his season high, .407. This time he managed to stay above .400 for nine more games, and then re-entered the sub-.400 realm. He'd hit .400 one more time on September 19th, and then that was it for the .400 chase. But not a bad run at all - having a .400 average as late as September 19 (with 13 games remaining in the season) is awesome.
Tony Gwynn
Then along comes Tony Gwynn, who, along with Wade Boggs, had pretty much set the standard for batting titles in the 1980s, winning four titles in the 80s and four more (four consecutive) in the 90s.
Player Year G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA
Gwynn 1994 110 475 419 79 165 35 1 12 64 5 0 48 19 .394
If my pre-teen self had seen this, it would have been 'not legit' all over again, baseball strike be damned.
Unlike Carew and Brett, Gwynn started strong, fashoning a .395 average by the end of April. It's hard to say whether or not Gwynn's foray into .400 was legitimate. It happened so early in the season - .402 on May 2nd, which was 33 hits in 82 at-bats. I'm thinking this is not enough of a season to say that a batter truly flirted with .400.
His last dip into the .400 waters came on May 15th, when he was batting .408 - 49-for-120. I am also noticing the wild fluctuation in his average at this time - .419 the day before, .398 the day after - based on this, I think this is more indicative of the kind of ups and downs seen in the early parts of a season.
That said, I am hardly downplaying Gwynn's spectacular batting prowess. He dodged, dipped, ducked, dived and dodged between .376 and .394 for the remainder of the season. It's amazing to have that type of consistency from a .294 hitter, let alone someone who is on the verge of .400.
Unfortunately, the big question when it comes to Tony Gwynn will remain unanswered forever: could he have hit .400 if the 1994 strike hadn't ended the season two months early? While I think that Gwynn was, perhaps, the best pure hitter of the 90s, I don't think he would have hit .400 for the season. No reason here, just what I think.
And then again, perhaps he could have. If I consider that Brett didn't top .400 until mid-August and Carew didn't get to .400 until June and had his last .400 day in mid-July, maybe. Sadly, it's all left to speculation now. I will say that if I thought anyone could have hit .400 at that time, Tony Gwynn would have been the guy on whom I'd have put my money.
Joe Mauer
Like Brett, Mauer has missed a significant amount of time in the season in which he chased/is chasing .400. He missed all of April (22 games), and a few other games here and there. He did finish May strongly, attaining a .414 batting average on the strength of a 41-for-99 performance.
Player Year G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA
Mauer 2009 64 282 241 49 90 13 1 15 49 1 1 35 35 .373
He stayed above .400 for a good part of June, holding on with a .407 average as of June 21st. But then his average saw a steady decline until he ended June with a .383 average. Not bad at all, but he's going the wrong way where .400 is concerned. As for July, he pushed his average back into the .390s, only to see that average dip, before bottoming out at .373 after an 0-for-9 drought in his last two games before the All-Star game.
Mauer still has 73 games to ply his trade, and I, for one, will be interested to see how he does coming away from the All-Star game. Even if he doesn't hit .400 this year, the fact that he was as close as he was, and the fact that he was hitting over .400 well into June is an endorsement of his belonging in the conversation with the four other great hitters mentioned earlier.
Again - as with Gwynn - the question: Can he hit .400? And again - as with Gwynn - I don't feel that he can. I'd love to see someone hit for that lofty an average again. And Mauer has already spent some quality time north of the Williams line this season. But I'll be watching the box scores to see how he does. And I'll be rooting for him.
A Comparison of the seasons
Player Year G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA
Williams 1941 143 606 456 135 185 33 3 37 120 2 4 147 27 .406
Carew 1977 155 694 616 128 239 38 16 14 100 23 13 69 55 .388
Brett 1980 117 515 449 87 175 33 9 24 118 15 6 58 22 .390
Gwynn 1994 110 475 419 79 165 35 1 12 64 5 0 48 19 .394
Mauer 2009 64 282 241 49 90 13 1 15 49 1 1 35 35 .373
Resources: Baseball Reference, of course.
Sunday, July 12, 2009
Diamondbacks Are A Phils Best Friend
So we close the book on the first half of the season, and the Phillies sit atop the NL East by four games. The weekend started with the Phils leading the pesky Florida Marlins by two games, but the Arizona Diamondbacks had the decency to split a four game series with the upstart Marlins - starting with a 14-7 win on Thursday - and give the Phils a chance to help themselves.
When the Phils entered this weekend series against the Pirates, I was cautiously optomistic. The Pirates are pretty poor, but they have good young pitching, and this sort of thing can sometimes derail an otherwise finely tuned Phillies machine. They seem to thrive against established pitchers (ask Johan Santana or Josh Beckett), and struggle against lesser known quantities.
Phillies 3, Pirates 2
D'Backs 8, Marlins 0
Against the Buccos though, the Phils came out and did what they needed to do. After surrendering a first inning run, Joe Blanton settled down and held the Pirates close, while the offense gave him three runs in the 3rd inning with the main blow delivered by newly minted All-Star Jayson Werth.
Blanton held the Pirates scoreless for the next 6 1/3 innings before turning it over to the 'pen. JC Romero turned in a scoreless, 13-pitch performance and then it was up to Brad Lidge to slam the door. He gave up a run to enable the Buccos to draw within a run, but then managed to get it done and earn his 18th save.
And getting back to an old stick of mine: the Phillies left four men on base. Not bad. I can live with 4 LOB.
Oh, and the Marlins were shut out that same night, falling 8-0 to the Diamondbacks. Happy to have a three-game edge in the division standings.
Phillies 8, Pirates 7
D'Backs 5, Marlins 1
Game two featured another rocky pitching performance by the Phillies ace, Cole Hamels. Yikes - five earned runs in six innings is not a pretty scene. Lucky for him that the Pirates bullpen, that had held the Phillies scoreless for 2 1/3 innings was unable to hold the lead.
Matt Stairs homered to start the 9th inning scoring (his ability to hit homers cold is amazing), and the oft-maligned hacker Ryan Howard (3-for-3 on the night) belted a 3-run homer to tie the game. It was almost inevitable when Paul Bako drove in the winning run.
It may not have been pretty, but it was a win. And the 11 LOB was a trend I was not happy to see. But...they won. And, for the second time in two days...so did the Diamondbacks, taking the second game against Florida 5-1. Oooh - that's a real humdinger! Now we're talking - Phillies are now four games up.
Phillies 5, Pirates 2
Marlins 8, D'Backs 1
The final game was pretty much owned by two guys - JA Happ and Pedro Feliz. Happ is such a wonderful surprise at 6-0. It pretty much offsets Hamels' struggles, but wouldn't it be great to have them both pitching well? Who knew the pitching staff would prove the be the saving grace of the Phillies? They've pitched pretty well these past few weeks.
Pirates pitcher Virgil Vasquez took it on the chin, lasting just 1 1/3 innings, surrendering five first inning runs with the coup-de-grace coming in the form of a Feliz grand slam. And beseiged Jimmy Rollins has raised his average to .229 - not bad, considering he was teetering on the verge of dropping below .200 (he was batting .205 on July 1).
Now - the All-Star game takes center stage and the Phillies can bask in the glow of a 4-game lead in the NL East. And then things get interesting.
The Phillies head off to Florida to duke it out in a four-game set with those Pesky Marlins. It's a golden opportunity to bury their foe. They need to take at least three games to stake their claim as the class of this underwhelming division. And if they manage to take all four...well, an 8-game deficit gets harder and harder to erase as July and August wear on.
Meanwhile, The Mets head off to face the tough Atlanta Braves. After wiping the floor with the Phillies just last week, I think the Braves owe it to the Phils to at least split the series with the Mets. Assuming the Phillies win all four games, that would leave the Braves 6 games out, the Mets 6 1/2 games out and the Marlins 8 games out.
Yeah, that sounds like a good plan. Get some rest, boys - you're gonna need it. Enjoy the All-Star break, and come back refreshed and ready to roll. It's time to create some separation.
Go Phils!
When the Phils entered this weekend series against the Pirates, I was cautiously optomistic. The Pirates are pretty poor, but they have good young pitching, and this sort of thing can sometimes derail an otherwise finely tuned Phillies machine. They seem to thrive against established pitchers (ask Johan Santana or Josh Beckett), and struggle against lesser known quantities.
Phillies 3, Pirates 2
D'Backs 8, Marlins 0
Against the Buccos though, the Phils came out and did what they needed to do. After surrendering a first inning run, Joe Blanton settled down and held the Pirates close, while the offense gave him three runs in the 3rd inning with the main blow delivered by newly minted All-Star Jayson Werth.
Blanton held the Pirates scoreless for the next 6 1/3 innings before turning it over to the 'pen. JC Romero turned in a scoreless, 13-pitch performance and then it was up to Brad Lidge to slam the door. He gave up a run to enable the Buccos to draw within a run, but then managed to get it done and earn his 18th save.
And getting back to an old stick of mine: the Phillies left four men on base. Not bad. I can live with 4 LOB.
Oh, and the Marlins were shut out that same night, falling 8-0 to the Diamondbacks. Happy to have a three-game edge in the division standings.
Phillies 8, Pirates 7
D'Backs 5, Marlins 1
Game two featured another rocky pitching performance by the Phillies ace, Cole Hamels. Yikes - five earned runs in six innings is not a pretty scene. Lucky for him that the Pirates bullpen, that had held the Phillies scoreless for 2 1/3 innings was unable to hold the lead.
Matt Stairs homered to start the 9th inning scoring (his ability to hit homers cold is amazing), and the oft-maligned hacker Ryan Howard (3-for-3 on the night) belted a 3-run homer to tie the game. It was almost inevitable when Paul Bako drove in the winning run.
It may not have been pretty, but it was a win. And the 11 LOB was a trend I was not happy to see. But...they won. And, for the second time in two days...so did the Diamondbacks, taking the second game against Florida 5-1. Oooh - that's a real humdinger! Now we're talking - Phillies are now four games up.
Phillies 5, Pirates 2
Marlins 8, D'Backs 1
The final game was pretty much owned by two guys - JA Happ and Pedro Feliz. Happ is such a wonderful surprise at 6-0. It pretty much offsets Hamels' struggles, but wouldn't it be great to have them both pitching well? Who knew the pitching staff would prove the be the saving grace of the Phillies? They've pitched pretty well these past few weeks.
Pirates pitcher Virgil Vasquez took it on the chin, lasting just 1 1/3 innings, surrendering five first inning runs with the coup-de-grace coming in the form of a Feliz grand slam. And beseiged Jimmy Rollins has raised his average to .229 - not bad, considering he was teetering on the verge of dropping below .200 (he was batting .205 on July 1).
Now - the All-Star game takes center stage and the Phillies can bask in the glow of a 4-game lead in the NL East. And then things get interesting.
The Phillies head off to Florida to duke it out in a four-game set with those Pesky Marlins. It's a golden opportunity to bury their foe. They need to take at least three games to stake their claim as the class of this underwhelming division. And if they manage to take all four...well, an 8-game deficit gets harder and harder to erase as July and August wear on.
Meanwhile, The Mets head off to face the tough Atlanta Braves. After wiping the floor with the Phillies just last week, I think the Braves owe it to the Phils to at least split the series with the Mets. Assuming the Phillies win all four games, that would leave the Braves 6 games out, the Mets 6 1/2 games out and the Marlins 8 games out.
Yeah, that sounds like a good plan. Get some rest, boys - you're gonna need it. Enjoy the All-Star break, and come back refreshed and ready to roll. It's time to create some separation.
Go Phils!
Thursday, July 9, 2009
The Phillies - Can We Believe?
Last year, on July 8th, 2008, the Phillies lost to the Mets 10-9, capping off a missed opportunity to bury the Mets by sweeping a 4-game series. Instead, they lost the last three games, and enabled the Mets to draw within 2 1/2 games.
Of course, the 2008 season turned out just fine for the Philadelphia phaithful, and now that we look at 2009, the nemesis is the Florida Marlins, who currently sit 2 games out, after scoring a win in the last of three games against the resurgent Giants. Thank you, San Francisco, for taking two of three. We'll pay you back next call...
After some shaky baseball that included three humbling losses to the Braves, one loss in three games to Toronto and two more losses to Tampa Bay - a 3-6 stretch, things weren't looking so good for the Phils. Like their jaded fans, I'd wager that Charlie Manuel's team was probably all too glad to be done with the American League.
But we'll take our chances against the AL in November, won't we, boys? :-)
Of course, as mentioned earlier, the return to NL competition didn't start off all that well, as Atlanta kicked the snot out of the Phils' bullpen, savaged ace Cole Hamels and survived a gutsy 7-inning gem by J.A. Happ. In the midst of Sherman's march through Philadelphia, something good did come.
Continuing a surreal batting slump that inspired a wretched reworking of a classic song and included an 0-8 log in the first two games, Jimmy Rollins made like Lazarus and went 2-for-4 in the third game. It's true that a .209 average was nothing to write home about, but the performance was a welcome respite as they headed into the maelstrom of a three-game weekend series against the hated rival Mets.
This time, it would be different. No more would the Phillies lose in spectacularly bad fashion to their rivals. Nay, an unknown Rodrigo Lopez pitched a terrific 6 1/3 innings and enjoyed a scoreless performance by the bullpen to take game one by a 7-2 count. And... Jimmy Rollins went 2-for-5 and raised his average to .212.
Yes, it's true that the Mets have been decimated by injuries. But that aside, the Phillies need to start winning games that they should win. They've lost too many winnable games already, and now they had the Mets by the throat. Could they send them packing again on Saturday?
The elder and wise statesman Jamie Moyer came, saw and conquered the Mets, scattering five hits and surrendering one earned run in 6 1/3 innings. Moyer also enjoyed a scoreless relief effort from the uneven bullpen, including a 13-pitch, 8 strike pitching outing from the once invincible, now merely very good, Brad Lidge.
Now the stage was set for that most delicious of things: a three-game sweep of a hated rival. What could possibly be more demoralizing than that? And what could possibly take the wind out of the Phillies sails more than the Mets salvaging a win?
But it was not to be, as Joe Blanton came storming out and silenced the Met bats, limiting them to four hits over 7 1/3 innings, and protecting a slim 2-0 margin - fueled by solo homers courtesy of Rollins and All-World Chase Utley. What made this one all the more impressive was that the Phillies felled arguably the best pitcher in baseball, Johan Santana.
So the sweep was complete. And now Phillies fans had something to cheer. Will it last? Considering they are in a very similar position as they were last year at this time, it certainly seems possible. I'd like to believe in the Phillies... and a series like the one they had against the Mets goes a long way toward restoring one's faith.
Go Phils!!
Of course, the 2008 season turned out just fine for the Philadelphia phaithful, and now that we look at 2009, the nemesis is the Florida Marlins, who currently sit 2 games out, after scoring a win in the last of three games against the resurgent Giants. Thank you, San Francisco, for taking two of three. We'll pay you back next call...
After some shaky baseball that included three humbling losses to the Braves, one loss in three games to Toronto and two more losses to Tampa Bay - a 3-6 stretch, things weren't looking so good for the Phils. Like their jaded fans, I'd wager that Charlie Manuel's team was probably all too glad to be done with the American League.
But we'll take our chances against the AL in November, won't we, boys? :-)
Of course, as mentioned earlier, the return to NL competition didn't start off all that well, as Atlanta kicked the snot out of the Phils' bullpen, savaged ace Cole Hamels and survived a gutsy 7-inning gem by J.A. Happ. In the midst of Sherman's march through Philadelphia, something good did come.
Continuing a surreal batting slump that inspired a wretched reworking of a classic song and included an 0-8 log in the first two games, Jimmy Rollins made like Lazarus and went 2-for-4 in the third game. It's true that a .209 average was nothing to write home about, but the performance was a welcome respite as they headed into the maelstrom of a three-game weekend series against the hated rival Mets.
This time, it would be different. No more would the Phillies lose in spectacularly bad fashion to their rivals. Nay, an unknown Rodrigo Lopez pitched a terrific 6 1/3 innings and enjoyed a scoreless performance by the bullpen to take game one by a 7-2 count. And... Jimmy Rollins went 2-for-5 and raised his average to .212.
Yes, it's true that the Mets have been decimated by injuries. But that aside, the Phillies need to start winning games that they should win. They've lost too many winnable games already, and now they had the Mets by the throat. Could they send them packing again on Saturday?
The elder and wise statesman Jamie Moyer came, saw and conquered the Mets, scattering five hits and surrendering one earned run in 6 1/3 innings. Moyer also enjoyed a scoreless relief effort from the uneven bullpen, including a 13-pitch, 8 strike pitching outing from the once invincible, now merely very good, Brad Lidge.
Now the stage was set for that most delicious of things: a three-game sweep of a hated rival. What could possibly be more demoralizing than that? And what could possibly take the wind out of the Phillies sails more than the Mets salvaging a win?
But it was not to be, as Joe Blanton came storming out and silenced the Met bats, limiting them to four hits over 7 1/3 innings, and protecting a slim 2-0 margin - fueled by solo homers courtesy of Rollins and All-World Chase Utley. What made this one all the more impressive was that the Phillies felled arguably the best pitcher in baseball, Johan Santana.
So the sweep was complete. And now Phillies fans had something to cheer. Will it last? Considering they are in a very similar position as they were last year at this time, it certainly seems possible. I'd like to believe in the Phillies... and a series like the one they had against the Mets goes a long way toward restoring one's faith.
Go Phils!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)