Just Bad Old Writing

Figurative language is a dangerous thing when employed by a man named Mark Sheldon. I know the Reds have been pretty bad since the ASG, but I wouldn't wish this sort of writing on any team except maybe the Cubs.

CINCINNATI -- With a day-night doubleheader looming for the Reds on Monday, manager Dusty Baker wanted to protect his bullpen like a lioness and her cubs or a college freshman and the last slice of pizza.

What?

I mean, I guess I understand the similes, but... what?

Unfortunately for Reds starter Bronson Arroyo, quality starts and victories are mixing like oil and water lately.

What?

Oh, I get it.

I've Got a Bone to Pick with MSNBC's HR Department.....

Celizic wrote again. I continue to wonder what anyone ever saw in this guy.

Time for Manny, Torre to earn their keep
As the Dodgers struggle, focus should be on star, manager

You could focus on how Raffy Furcal shit the bed this year, or how someone sapped Russell Martin's power. You could focus on the fact that the first baseman can't slug his way out of a paper bag, or the fact that injuries have dilapidated the rotation to the point where knucklejunkit Chuck Haeger made a start (and will make another today) for arguably the best team in baseball. You could look at a little bad luck, or the fact that their "decline" is more rooted in how hot the Colorado Rockies are than how less-than-good the Dodgers are playing.

But you can ABSOLUTELY NOT focus on a guy who doesn't play for the team, or THE FUCKING STAR LEFT FIELDER HITTING .306/.424/.536. Remember these slash stats. You will be seeing them many times in this post.

When the Dodgers opened the vault to hire Joe Torre, it was because of his ability to manage teams under playoff stress. And when they dug deep to sign Manny Ramirez, it was because of his ability to drag a team into the playoffs by his dreadlocks.

Which he is failing miserably at to the tune of .306/.424/.536.

This would be a good time for both to live up to their reputation: Torre as the unflappable leader whose teams never panic, even when they can’t buy a win; Manny as one of baseball’s most reliable RBI machines.

The Dodgers are 6-4 in their last 10....they can't BUY a win.

And Manny sucks too. .306/.424/.536.

Nobody’s blaming Torre for what could be a memorable collapse should the Rockies continue their torrid pace and the Dodgers fail to remember how to win. At least not in Los Angeles, they aren’t.

The Dodgers are 12-14 this month. Vulnerable, but saying that they "forgot how to win", is insane. Most very good teams have at least one month like this.

And so the blame for the Dodger doldrums is falling squarely on the shoulders of Manny.

Ex....cuse me? You're pointing the finger at the best offensive player on the team, (who, might I add, is hitting .306/.424/.536)?

Normally, calling one player on the carpet for a team’s problems is too simplistic. But in this case, it’s not.

Mike Celizic has thoroughly analyzed the performances of everyone on the roster and has come to the conclusion that Manny Ramirez is the problem. He tried several different methods, and all of them output that Manny is the problem. I'm serious.

...

...

Naw, I'm kidding. He just figured out his batting average since the All-Star break and cited some freakish RBI stats.

If Manny were even half the player he was last year, the Dodgers would be comfortably in first place

1) The Dodgers are (sort of) comfortably in first place.
2) You're blaming Manny for not repeating one of the best two-month performances of all-time.
3) .306/.424/.536

and I’d probably be writing yet another column about the — groan! — AL East.

At least you recognize what a fuckstick you are about your writing topics.

At this time last year, Manny was as awesome a force as you’ll see. After arriving from Boston, he averaged an RBI a game and dragged L.A. into the playoffs.

Yes. This, Mike Celizic, is not what we in the baseball world called "normal". We call this superhumanly clutch, or fluketasticly spectacular. No one in the world can do that on a monthly basis.

He signed a short but sweet contract in the spring, took nearly two months off early in the season to serve a suspension for violating the league’s drug policy, came back with his signature dreads longer than ever, and then disappeared.

It's true. Ask opposing pitchers whether they noticed the guy hitting .306/.424/.536. Nowhere to be seen.

Brett Favre was better down the stretch for the Jets last year than Manny has been in August for L.A. John Smoltz wasn’t as bad for the Red Sox this year than Manny has been for the Dodgers.

First of all, who the hell is "Brett Favre"?

Second.....

A guy who had averaged a 55.4 passer rating and a 2/9 TD/INT over the last 5 games of the regular season, and a guy with an 8.32 ERA weren't as bad for their respective teams than the supreme junkiest player in sports, who has been hitting .306/.424./.536.

Huh.

I give up. If he doesn't get fired for writing that, I don't think he ever will.

He’s been so bad he got booed in Dodgers Stadium the other day when he misplayed a ball into a triple and put another 0-for-4 in the box score in another loss.

Asshole. WE DON'T CARE WHAT YOU DID IN JUNE, MANNY!

Dodgers fans aren’t given to booing — it takes too much energy and demands that the spectators actually pay attention to the game.

Mike Celizic isn't given to facts - they take too much research and demand that the writer actually follow the sport in question.

But even Dodgers fans have their limits, and Manny has found them with one of the worst months he’s probably ever had in his career.

Manny Ramirez, August: .306/.424/.536.

Naw, just kidding. It's .287/.391/.415. Quit dragging down the universe, Manny.

Through Sunday’s games, Manny had played 22 games in August. In two of those games, he performed like Manny, getting a home run and three RBIs in each of them. In the other 20 games, he has zero home runs and a grand total of six RBIs, a hitting pace that a lot of pitchers have little trouble keeping up with. He’s driven in just one run in his last dozen games.

Congratulations. You've found the worst possible way to evaluate a person's month-long performance in history.

He’s hitting .303 on the season, but only .254 since the All-Star break.

I told you there would be some dumb batting average-related thing in here.

The Dodgers are not a bad hitting team.

Uh huh.....

They lead the National League in team batting average and on-base percentage.

Which is "not bad", as you said.

Normally, that’s a sure formula for winning baseball. And when Manny’s driving in runs, it is.

Manny Ramirez is the only player on the Los Angeles Dodgers responsible for driving in runs. It's actually impossible for James Loney and Andre Ethier to do it.

The Dodgers are third in the NL in scoring, with 603 runs. But they’re 10th in slugging percentage

Clearly the fault of that .536-slugging Manny. By the way, Manny's complete line for the season? .306/.424/.536

All other things being equal, when Manny is hitting, they win. When he’s not hitting, they have problems.

When you set all other factors equal in two scenarios, the performance of the one variable factor will pretty much determine the difference in outcome of the two scenarios.

And that's totally how it's worked with the Dodgers this year.

So far, there’s no sign that Torre has done anything to light a fire under Manny.

No need to strike a match to ignite a fully spreading-and-dangerous wildfire.

Right now, nobody’s blaming Torre for that. But if things continue to go badly in Colorado and if that once huge lead continues to erode like a sand castle in a hurricane, somebody’s going to bring it up.

And if they don’t, they should.

Three-oh-six, four-twenty-four, five-thirty-six.

A Mixed Bag of Silly Baseball Comments

Dayn Perry's overly stilted introduction to his article on disappointing baseball players and teams:

Great expectations -- so much more than a heavy-handed Dickensian romp! In this case, we're talking great expectations unmet.

What? I guess when you dial up Dayn Perry's articles, you can expect a nickel's worth of baseball insight as well as a nickel's worth of literary criticism.

___________________________________________________________________

An article regarding several recent disputes between batterymates:

"The very best pitch a pitcher can throw is the one he throws with his heart," said Brent Mayne, a veteran of 15 seasons and author of the book "The Art of Catching."

I think I know what Mr. Mayne is trying to say here... but (*&^ the heck, Brent, you can't throw baseballs with your heart!

_________________________________________________________________

From a pretty pointless article where MLB player Ron Hunt, famous for being hit by a pitch a lot, was asked for his perspective on several recent mound chargings:

"I don't understand what is happening with all of this stuff," said Hunt from his home in Wentzville, Mo. "Maybe it's a case of me being 'old school' but it seems like they don't play the game the right way anymore."

I wish someone would take a poll of retired major leaguers and ask a simple question:
Do players today play the game the right way?

Hunt didn't establish himself as a player noted for being hit by pitches until he was traded by the Los Angeles Dodgers to the San Francisco Giants after the 1967 season.

"It was so cold in that ballpark in San Francisco that we had to wear everything we could under our uniforms to stay warm," recalls Hunt. "We bundled up so much it was hard to get loose and swing the bat. I just decided that I was going to crowd the plate, not give in, and hit the ball up the middle and do whatever it took to get to first base."

Apparently "playing the game the right way" means having such little confidence in one's hitting skill that it requires crowding the plate and hoping to get hit by a pitch.

That's playing the game the right way.

New Season, Same Dumbassery from Easterbrook

From Easterbrook's AFC Preview:

Touchdowns are pretty good stuff in football; players who produce touchdowns would seem to have value. Yet of the top 10 active NFL touchdown producers, six [were cut] (Terrell Owens,

Who was cut for salary/distraction reasons and quickly signed by The Bills, who were one of many teams competing for Owen's services.

Marvin Harrison

Washed up over a year ago.

Edgerrin James

Hasn't averaged 4 yards per carry since leaving the Colts, expensive.

Joey Galloway

38 years old, played in 9 games last year and caught 13 passes.

Tony Gonzalez

An expensive luxury that a rebuilding team couldn't afford.

Torry Holt

Ditto.

a seventh (LaDainian Tomlinson) was told to take a pay cut or hit the road

Had the worst year of his career last year and is signed to a large salary.

Only three of the top 10 active touchdown producers (Randy Moss, Isaac Bruce and Clinton Portis) were asked back without reservation by their teams.

Moss: Still one of the best 3 WR's in the game, relatively cheap salary.
Bruce: Cheap.
Clinton Portis: Still one of the best RB's in the game.

Of course, aging athletes often lose their ability to gain yards and score points -- though something tells me several mentioned in the above paragraphs will end up with more productive 2009 seasons than the younger players who got their roster slots.

The Rams and Chiefs know that they're probably not going to get better production out of the guys who replace Holt and Gonzo, but they can be assured that they won't be paying them big salaries, and they're not going to compete anyway.

Yet with the prominent exception of Brett Favre, the NFL seems increasingly eager to toss aside highly productive stars and coaches, handing their positions to people you've never heard of.

Just off the top of my head: Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Tom Brady, Carson Palmer, LT, OchoCinco, Ray Lewis, Ed Reed, Ben Roethlisburger, Hines Ward. Highly productive stars who have yet to be given the boot.

Could this be economic? In almost every case, the player or coach hired to replace an aging on-field or sideline star is paid less. NFL owners and general managers may increasingly be thinking, "Why pay for big names when we can drag some guy in off the street and no one will know the difference?" If this is what NFL owners and general managers are thinking, it's a slippery slope. As TMQ reminds, there is no law of nature that mandates the NFL must remain super-popular. Any sense that corners are being cut would be terrible for the sport.

See if you can follow Gregg's logic:

1. NFL teams are more and more likely to cut productive players to save money.
2. Despite NFL free agent salaries being determined by a free market, those new free agents inexplicably go unsigned, and therefore, do something besides play in the NFL.
3. The NFL talent pool declines.

Dumb.

I plan to use Twitter strictly to let readers know when the column posts. As soon as a new TMQ is up on Tuesdays, I'll send out a tweet. I don't plan to clog your laptop or cell phone with running commentary

I would pay good money to subscribe to a TMQ stream of consciousness Twitter feed. Here are some examples of the ensuing posts I would enjoy:

the_smartest_man_alive12: PHL punting 4th and 3 their own 45 in 1st q. Avg play = 5 yards. Buck buck bawk!

the_smartest_man_alive12: @the_tastefully_named_spencer_easterbrook: I just wrote 'game over' in my book too!

the_smartest_man_alive12: @the_tastefully_named_spencer_easterbrook: How did you delete your post saying 'game over' for PHL?

the_smartest_man_alive12: @the_tastefully_named_spencer_easterbrook: I TOLD YOU TO KNOCK WHEN I'M WRITING THE CHEERLEADER SECTION OF TMQ!

the_smartest_man_alive12: Ohio State is ahead of Akron by 13 in the 2nd quarter and they're still passing!

the_smartest_man_alive12: Did you see all the factual inaccuracies regarding Texas 4a football in tonight's FNL ep? WTF!?

Hey John Kruk, Get Your Head out of Your Ass

Hello there, Tubby. Put down that bacon and have a look at this. It's the National League Wild Card standings, as of last Sunday night.

Team GB
Colorado 0.0
San Francisco 3.0
Atlanta 4.0
Florida 5.0

Guess what you said that night on national TV?

The wild card is the Braves' to lose.

You really said that. You bumblefuck. You imbecile. You fatheaded, knuckle-dragging moron. Back in June, you said you thought the Mets would win the Wild Card. That's fine. I got upset about it, partially because I'm a Rockies fan (meaning I was acting all butthurt), and partially because the reasoning you used to back up your opinion was shoddy at best. But at least it was a reasonable opinion to have, in and of itself. There really was nothing wrong with thinking the Mets were a decent WC contender back then. I'm sure 90% of optimistic Mets fans could have made a more persuasive argument than you did but that's OK. At least your starting point was acceptable.

That's not the case here.

Maybe if the 1927 Yankees were trailing the 1962 Mets and 1998 Marlins in the WC race by three and four games, respectively, on August 24, you could say the playoff berth was "the Yankees' to lose." But here we're dealing with a group of reasonably similar teams. They all have strengths; they all have weaknesses; some are stronger/weaker than others in certain areas. I am of the opinion that the Rockies are the best of the four, but hey, I could be wrong. How might we figure out who's best?

By simple statistics? The Rockies have the best OPS+ of the group and an OPS+ well over 100 (admittedly, the Braves and Giants have better staffs). They also play better defense than any of their WC competitors.

What about by ease of remaining schedule? The Rockies also play 21 of their final 32 at home, with a schedule that is arguably easier than Atlanta's or San Fran's. Food for thought, no pun intended.

What about momentum? Two months ago, the Braves were 5.5 games out of the WC lead. A month ago, they were 3.5 out. After Sunday's games, they were 4 games back. (Now 5.5 back. Oops!) It's not like they've been on some kind of torrid hot streak. Colorado DOES happen to be 52-22 since July 2, 2006 or June 3, 2009, I don't remember which.

What about nerdy stat stuff used for predictions? Baseball Prospectus's playoff odds calculator placed their chances of making the postseason as of Sunday night at just over 10%. It's also not like they've got a great pythagorean record, and are due to go on some kind of hot streak. No, in fact, there is no indication of any sort that the WC is the Braves' to lose.

So... who should receive the blessing as current best bet to win the NL WC? Well... if I had to pick a team from the race to currently apply that label to... I might pick... THE TEAM THAT'S BEEN THE BEST IN THE NATIONAL LEAGUE FOR THE PAST THREE MONTHS, WHICH HOLDS A FOUR GAME LEAD WITH LESS THAN FORTY FUCKING GAMES TO PLAY. YOU FUCKING FAT PIECE OF SHIT. WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM? ARE YOU BAITING ME INTO MAKING POSTS LIKE THIS? ARE YOU DAYN PERRY? DO YOU JUST SAY SHIT LIKE THIS TO GET ATTENTION? HOW CAN YOU POSSIBLY SAY THE WILD CARD IS "THE BRAVES' TO LOSE?" AT THE VERY MOST, THEY'LL BE LUCKY TO HAVE A SHOT AT WINNING IT ASSUMING BOTH COLORADO AND SAN FRAN GO COLD. Seriously, guy, fuck you. Fuck you and fuck your shitty analysis. Your reasoning when you made that claim about the Braves had something to do with the depth in Atlanta's rotation. WELL WHERE HAS THAT DEPTH GOTTEN THEM? FIVE AND A HALF GAMES OUT OF THE PLAYOFFS WITH ABOUT 35 GAMES TO PLAY, THAT'S WHERE.

Look, I'm not saying the Rockies will win the WC. They very well may not. (BP's playoff odds have them at a 61% chance to win it as of now.) I wouldn't say it's "theirs to lose." I wouldn't say it's any team's "to lose" right now. But if you don't think the Rockies have the best shot of this bunch to win it... you are a fucking dunce. If you want to go one step further, and hint that if they're going to win it they'll need to snatch it away (a corollary of it being "the Braves' to lose," I suppose) from someone else, you're a fucking dunce with clown shoes on. There is no hope for you. You have zero credibility. You should be fired and deported to Mongolia so you can't bother anyone with your opinions anymore. Fuck you. Fuck you and fuck your NL East bias. YOU DIDN'T EVEN PLAY FOR THE BRAVES, PIEFACE. FUCK YOU.

Hey, you know, the Rockies are only 2 games back of the Dodgers for the NL West title. I guess it's theirs to lose, huh?

Irony is Awesome

Two days after demonstrating that he has absolutely no conception of what the term "rally-killer" means, Jeff Francoeur decided today to go out and play a game of baseball.

For those of us that appreciate cosmic irony, Jeff Francoeur's performance tonight indicates that he has a deep and unique knowledge of what it means to be a rally killer - so much that he, with a mighty swing, managed to kill a ninth-inning rally better than any other man in baseball history.

Well done, Jeff. We salute you.

Get an Education

A tip of the cap to current Mets outfielder and former Braves outfielder Jeff Francoeur, who recently said something so stupid that it merited its own post with his picture from the team he used to play for because it's funnier than any picture I could find of him playing for the team he currently plays for.

Regarding last night's Mets-Braves game, in which the Mets kicked around Braves starter Derek Lowe in the 4th inning:

The Mets reeled off 10 hits in the fourth, setting a franchise record for one inning.

Hey, cool, it's not every night you set a franchise record!

"That was a lot of fun," Jeff Francoeur said. "You just keep pounding balls into the gap. The one thing you don't want to do is hit a home run. That's a rally-killer."

Really?

Also a tip of the cap to the old FJM, which first brought to my attention the fact that some people in baseball actually believe homered runs are undesirable events. And a tip of the cap to A-Dave for passing along this tidbit of foolishness.

Too Soon to Start Posting About Football? Clearly Not. Too Soon to Trivialize Hurricane Katrina's Impact? Probably

Pat Forde has a column out which focuses on NCAA football's 40 all-time greatest villains. It's interesting at parts; Brian Bosworth is #1, which is appropriate considering he was a once-in-a-generation overrated loudmouth roid-using dickwad. Whistle-blowing Phil Fulmer is on the list, as are Ty Willingham (for singlehandedly destroying two very proud programs) and Nick Saban (for being a complete waste of skin who should be shot into deep space). There are also a lot of guys on there who weren't bad people, just guys who broke other teams' hearts with great plays like Matt Davison and Lindsay Scott. Blah blah blah. Then there's this:

38. Kellen Winslow -- Miami tight end, 2001-03

Hated by: Military veterans.

Claim to Infamy: After contentious game against Tennessee Nov. 8, 2003, two years after 9/11, Winslow declared himself a soldier. Declared college football war. Declared that the Volunteers were out to kill him, so he in turn was out to kill them. Did not declare for military service, not then or ever.

I love that "I'M A FUCKING SOLDIER" soundbite, but yeah, I see where Pat is coming from. Mr. Motorcycle Accident here was trivializing something that's very serious and important, and really can't be compared to anything in sports. So then, anyone want to explain why Chad's article also contains this?

13. Hurricane Katrina -- Act of God, 2005

Hated by: Tulane.

Claim to Infamy: Massive storm and subsequent flooding turned promising Green Wave season into disaster. Playing away from home all season, Tulane went 2-9 and still hasn't recovered. After winning 18 games from 2002-04, Green Wave have only won 12 games in the four seasons since the storm.

Right. Yeah. Let's discuss cognitive dissonance, and try to figure out why Chad doesn't experience it. Kellen Winslow talking about being a soldier was bad because being a soldier is really a whole lot more serious and (in certain ways) significant than being an athlete. And in that same way, identifying Hurricane Katrina as a "sports villain" is bad because the impact of Katrina was really a whole lot more serious and (in pretty much every way) significant than just ruining an NCAA football season.

Boy, that 9/11 really was a bummer, wasn't it? Totally messed up the end of the 2001 MLB regular season. What a villain!

I'm not actually trying to make a 9/11 joke, just trying to put Pat's idiocy into perspective.

Hmmmm. Should probably just stop writing now.

/stops digging metaphorical hole

/backs away slowly

/sprints to waiting car, peels out and accelerates away

/intentionally runs over Nick Saban

It's Just Poor Presentation

In his "Dodds and Ends" (get it?) blog, Dennis Dodd wanted to make the point that USC is an extremely vulnerable team due to inexperience at quarterback. A somewhat valid point, I suppose.

He cleverly catches readers' attentions with the headline:

Ohio State 55, USC 23

Just for grins, I decided to insert Matt Barkley as the starter for USC against Ohio State in NCAA Football 10.

Really, Dennis? This is your job? No wonder our bloggers hate you. You're as smart as us but your employer pays you to screw around all day while the rest of us have real jobs like law student.

Ohio State won by 32. Barkley, the freshman quarterback, was game in the game but his team was lame. He was yanked quickly after his fumble led to a touchdown. Barkley completed only one of two for 23 yards.

I'm glad I got specific stats on a fucking PlayStation game that Dennis Dodd simulated.

This is the kind of shit that made people get pissed off back when blogs were slowly becoming a big deal: they inspire a lot more writing of a lot lower quality.

Some of You May Already Have Seen This, But I Didn't Make The Label For No Reason!

I believe this speaks for itself.