I'm on Chris Bosh's side
Of course fans have a right to boo. In fact, I think its a good thing to sometimes let your team know you're not very pleased with their performance. It's a little harsh, like kicking someone when they're already down, but it can even serve a purpose outside of just venting - its one hell of a wake up call.
Now, I didn't watch the game, because TSN2 might be the worst thing in Canadian sports media since Greg Millen. If Bosh was getting booed individually, I might argue that's a wee bit uncalled for. Sure, he's struggled recently, and maybe had his worst night of the year, but Chris Bosh isn't the source of Raptor fan's frustrations. He's rightly regarded as a hero in Toronto, and one bad game from a player who's been trying to carry the team on his back is not a valid reason to boo. But still, fans can do what they want, all I'm saying here is that I wouldn't be booing Bosh if I was there, even though he was having a bad game. If you want to boo, however, go right ahead, and I don't really think you should feel that bad about it.
What I am going to nitpick, however, is the bickering that's been going on after.
It's ok to boo. It's even ok to boo without adequate justification: I was at the game where AJ Burnett got booed off the field and flipped his cap at the fans, and even though I thought it was a bad idea and more than a little mean to a guy who's clearly just having a hard day, it was a bunch of drunk people who just had their Saturday ruined by a person who the newspaper always says is a bum. I get it, even when I don't agree.
But I think Chris Bosh was within his rights to be upset about it. And I like that he wasn't shy about saying so. Toronto being a hockey town and all, I guess the prevailing logic is that when you're booed by the hometown fans, your only classy response is to act sheepish, put your tail between your legs, and apologize to the fans for disappointing them.
Of course, this is complete bullshit. As Bosh said, the fans were booing when they were down 3 against the Dallas Mavericks (not the powerhouse they once were, but certainly not a team Raptors fans were assuming they would beat, right?). Bosh didn't like getting booed, and neither did the Raptors. There's a difference between saying "Its our right to boo you because you sucked tonight", and saying "We're going to boo you, and you're going to like it."
Frankly, I think its great the Raptors are mad. Going on a long roadtrip with that whole "us against the world"/"even our fans aren't on our side" mentality, a harsh wakeup call, and a warmup game against a doormat is just what a struggling underachieving team with confidence issues needs.
I bet they come back better than they left, I just hope it won't be too late.
Besides, are they really playing so bad?
They lost relatively close games against New Orleans, Dallas, and NJ. NO got some hot outside shooting, Dallas benefited from Bosh's worst game of the year, and NJ had one of those "no one can stop Devin Harris" nights. Other than getting blown out by the legitimately better Cavs, we've played pretty well in the last little while (our only other loss was that heartbreaker against Portland, another good team that we almost beat). But because of bad karma, low confidence, or whatever it is, we're not getting wins.
But in my opinion, the last couple weeks have shown that the Raptors aren't that bad. There's no reason the current lineup can't contend with the likes of NO, Dallas, and Portland - all mid level contenders in the stronger Western Conference.
There's two things I like about this. First, we're bound to start getting those wins eventually. Second, we might be a couple tweaks from being a very good team.
Closing Perspective
I know its easy to see the Raptors game as a continously worsening trainwreck. It sucks, and there's no way of getting out of conclusions that: a) we've dug ourselves a significant early hole if we intend to have a respectable record and playoff seeding at the end of the year, and b) the chances that this team becomes a mid to high level condender (as we all hoped at the beginning of thea year) are looking increasingly remote.
While those conclusions are beyond reproach, looking at the season as a continuous trainwreck isn't really accurate considering the nuances and context of our current situation.
The season started off pretty good, but not great. We were mildly disappointing, but showing signs of gelling, which is understandable since we lacked depth, and were relying heavily on a new star acquisition who's been injured the last few years. Anyway this looked like a .500 team who would be hard-pressed to beat the best teams in the league like Boston (albeit capable of giving them a scare every once in a while), beating bad teams, and being competitive with most of the better mid-level teams out there.
Then Vince Carter ripped everyone's hearts out on November 21st. This was one of the most spirit crushing losses I've ever experienced, and certainly the worst one i've ever seen in person. You could see the effect it had on the team later that weekend against Boston, and after a couple rebound wins at home, they started a diastrous road trip with JO injured and disaster swirling around them.
I don't want to talk about the road trip, but we got repeatedly blown out (albeit by some good teams), lost a coach, then lost a couple more big games peppered with our good loss against Portland.
After that, we've been half decent.
Without that horrendous stretch from the NJ game to the Cavs blowout, the Raptors haven't been that horrible. There's obviously some problems, especailly in close games, but we've been competitive against the teams we should be competitive with. After a few adjustments, and after getting some confidence back, I think the season could be salvaged.
Friday, December 19, 2008
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Marcum's Elbow Ruins Everything...
The thing is that, a week ago, we were set in terms of starting pitching for 2009, even if AJ Burnett is a Yankee or whatever. Doc Halladay was the Ace, then we had 3 young pitchers who, while still oozing potential, established themselves as very good ML pitchers; Marcum, Litsch, and McGowan. Purcey, late in year, evidenced enough upside so that he could maybe join that group (all three of those guys had similar inconsistencies as Starters for a while, but grew out of them pretty expediently). And even if Purcey didn't quite work out (as it sometimes doesn't), we're only talking about a 5th starter, and we have a surplus of bullpen arms that could do nicely if it didn't work out, and if not, we have some AAA guys. Most teams throw out some sort of wildcard as their 5th starter, so I think we'd be more than covered.
Only Marcum needs a doctor to build him an elbow. Which ruins everything.
All of a sudden, the fact that McGowan is missing the first month or two of the 2009 season seems important. Doc, Litsch, Purcey, X and Y is a completely different animal than what I mentioned above. Given that its unpredictable, lets look at the best case and worse case scenerios.
Best Case:
1. Roy has a similar season to this season. While its no sure thing, this looks pretty good.
2. Litsch continues to pitch the way he did since being recalled from AAA. While young pitchers fall off all the time after big starts, Litsch has put two extended good stretches together this season, mitigated by a smaller, awful stretch. Furthermore, he can reinvent himself, as he did in his AAA stint. I think this means that if he falters, he can get it back pretty soon. I'd say, at this point, its almost as good as having Marcum in this spot.
3. McGowan, who has electric stuff, comes back from the injury and becomes a little more consistent than he was in 2007 and 2008, both pretty good years for a number 3 starter. But if he improves a little, he's a very good 3rd starter or even a good 2nd starter. 2009esque Burnett is probably optimistic, but its not absure for a best case scenerio.
4/5. Purcey or Janssen are both serviceable. Or pretty good. Or one is serviceable. Or one is pretty good. Either way, I'm thinking if we get one of them to have a good year, we're set. Even if this doesn't work out, there are other options, but getting something from one of these young pitchers would really help.
Worst Case:
1. 2 possible situations here; Doc has sort of a hangover year after hitting a home run in 2008 (it happens...), or Doc gets hurt. Even in a hangover year, though, he's still an ace. As for the injury thing, Roy is as durable as anyone (9CG?) and anyone could get injured.
2. Litsch struggles. Even in this case, he becomes more of a serviceable depth starter as opposed to a young arm holding down a prime spot in a strong rotation.
3. Regarding McGowan, since he's got some amazing stuff, I'd say he won't go into the sort of freefall that I could possibly (but hopefully unlikely) imagine for Litsch. In other words, the worst case scenerio for McGowan would be some mix of the inconsistency that plagued him in 2007 and the injury problems in 2008. Even if this were to happen, I'd say he's still a decent 3rd starter compared to most around the league, and he'd still be good for throwing a gem every couple of starts.
4/5. Even if everything goes pretty bad, I'd say its extremely improbable that none of Purcey, Jannsen, Richmond, Parrish, Wolfe, some AAA shmuck, or possibly Downs if we convert him doesn't at least produce a average/ slightly below average 4th or 5th guy. Then we only have one more slot to fill, and we'd only have one guy in the rotation who was completely unreliable. Contrast this with some of the other pitching staffs around the league (or the type of rotation we started 2007 with), and most teams have this sort of situation. And whatever JP's misgivings are, we can at least rely on Moneyball tactics to fine one guy to fill this rather undemanding role.
Ok, so what I think comes across from all this is that without Marcum a) its going to be hard to predict what our pitching staff will be like next year, b) possible outcomes, in my opinion, range from an above average starting rotation (albeit not the dominant 2008 ptichng staff) in the optimistic scenerio, but no worse than an average starting rotation even if most guys stumble a little.
However, if we were to throw a decent free agent pitcher into the equation, I'd say the range of possibilities is restored to pre-Tommy-John-Marcum standing. By this, I mean that, like before the injury, our pitching staff would range from excellent if things work out very well to above average even if we get a reasonable amount of setbacks.
The problem is that getting Free Agents is harder than it seems, especailly for a small market team like Toronto. I have a theory that GM's shouldn't be judged very harshly on FA contracts that are too high; because if you're just offering Fair Market Value for someone, you probably won't get them unless their wife is from the city or something like that. Therefore, you have to go into FA bidding knowing that you're going to have overpay to get somebody. Its better to pre-understand that every FA contract (for a FA with a substantial amount of interst, anyway) is going to look bad compared to other contracts, and that the 20-40% difference (or whatever it is) should be written off as the cost of acquiring an asset without giving up another (like via Trade).
But its always easier to make someone stay, than convince them to sign as an FA. I guess the reason for this is that players become accustomed to their team and the city, or maybe that during the period leading up to when they are actually a FA the team offers them a deal that the player figures approaches the amount they would make on the open market, and they say "what the hell" and forgoe a chance at making a few million more because they don't want to move or figure not taking it is a little risky because they could get hurt or that the market could collapse or something. Actually, the Jays have been pretty good at this under later-era JP. So, compared to paying the "FA Premium" for someone else, they might be able to save a little if they throw a big contract at AJ Burnett before he opts out.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think they'll get much of a discount for AJ. Probably our offer would at least have to approach (by this I mean be within 5-7 million or so) what AJ (and his Agent) figures will be the probable offer from the Yankees or the Cubs or whoever. You'd still be playing the FA Premium and giving what would likely be considered a bad contract, but this would be our only chance to target someone who would want to play in Toronto for an amount around what anyone else would pay, rather than most other guys whom we would have to pay significantly over this amount.
I think AJ would want to stay in Toronto, just as long as its not costing him 10 million or anything like that. A lot has changed since everyone booed him off the mound (at a game I was at, although I didn't boo; as a rule I find it hard to justify booing pitchers), and he seemed to genuinely respond to what seems like a much friendlier atmosphere these days, both in a dugout that seems to have a lot more fun in the second half of the season, and a fanbase that has slowly but surely picked up on the good vibes. AJ is no lawyer, and generally says what he thinks, and its hard not to hear a change from when he was telling everyone he wanted to play for the Cubs to his more recent comments. He seems to have a lot of fun with the rest of the team. Also, if its success he's after, given that Boston, Tampa, Anaheim, and CWS all have very strong Starting Rotations and thus probably aren't going to put in much of a push for him. I guess I'd throw the Cubs in that group too, although who knows what's happening in the NL. More likely, the big contract he's looking at is with the Yankees, and do the 2009 Yankees really look that better than the 2009 Blue Jays?
I think, when you look at the 2009 rotation issues above, finding a way to retain AJ really would solve a lot of the questions. Its going to be hard to admit, but at least in the last couple months, AJ has been even more reliable than Doc. He's defintely the protypical "could put together a 'Perfect Storm' season" and win a Cy in any given year. If we keep him for another 4 or 5 years, we might get 2 or 3 stinkers, but I bet we get a couple 2008-ish years too, and maybe even a dominant year. He's not Pedro, but he's (probably) not Zito either.
Then, think about 2010, if Marcum comes back at full strength. We had the best pitching in baseball this year, and only Halladay strung it together for the full year. Burnett got better as the year went on, but had more than his fair share of horrible starts (inflating his ERA, which seems unfairly high for the type of season he had). With Marcum, we got an evolution of Good Marcum - Great Marcum - Hurt Elbow - Mediocre Marcum - Strange AAA demotion - Great Marcum - Tommy John Surgery. Litsch similarly went through a few phases; Great Litsch who was talked about as an Allstar - slow turn into Terrible Litsch - AAA demotion - New Great Litsch. I don't even remember what McGowan was doing, but he's continuing to improve, and is completely unhittable sometimes. Definitely a very intimidating rotation.
Only Marcum needs a doctor to build him an elbow. Which ruins everything.
All of a sudden, the fact that McGowan is missing the first month or two of the 2009 season seems important. Doc, Litsch, Purcey, X and Y is a completely different animal than what I mentioned above. Given that its unpredictable, lets look at the best case and worse case scenerios.
Best Case:
1. Roy has a similar season to this season. While its no sure thing, this looks pretty good.
2. Litsch continues to pitch the way he did since being recalled from AAA. While young pitchers fall off all the time after big starts, Litsch has put two extended good stretches together this season, mitigated by a smaller, awful stretch. Furthermore, he can reinvent himself, as he did in his AAA stint. I think this means that if he falters, he can get it back pretty soon. I'd say, at this point, its almost as good as having Marcum in this spot.
3. McGowan, who has electric stuff, comes back from the injury and becomes a little more consistent than he was in 2007 and 2008, both pretty good years for a number 3 starter. But if he improves a little, he's a very good 3rd starter or even a good 2nd starter. 2009esque Burnett is probably optimistic, but its not absure for a best case scenerio.
4/5. Purcey or Janssen are both serviceable. Or pretty good. Or one is serviceable. Or one is pretty good. Either way, I'm thinking if we get one of them to have a good year, we're set. Even if this doesn't work out, there are other options, but getting something from one of these young pitchers would really help.
Worst Case:
1. 2 possible situations here; Doc has sort of a hangover year after hitting a home run in 2008 (it happens...), or Doc gets hurt. Even in a hangover year, though, he's still an ace. As for the injury thing, Roy is as durable as anyone (9CG?) and anyone could get injured.
2. Litsch struggles. Even in this case, he becomes more of a serviceable depth starter as opposed to a young arm holding down a prime spot in a strong rotation.
3. Regarding McGowan, since he's got some amazing stuff, I'd say he won't go into the sort of freefall that I could possibly (but hopefully unlikely) imagine for Litsch. In other words, the worst case scenerio for McGowan would be some mix of the inconsistency that plagued him in 2007 and the injury problems in 2008. Even if this were to happen, I'd say he's still a decent 3rd starter compared to most around the league, and he'd still be good for throwing a gem every couple of starts.
4/5. Even if everything goes pretty bad, I'd say its extremely improbable that none of Purcey, Jannsen, Richmond, Parrish, Wolfe, some AAA shmuck, or possibly Downs if we convert him doesn't at least produce a average/ slightly below average 4th or 5th guy. Then we only have one more slot to fill, and we'd only have one guy in the rotation who was completely unreliable. Contrast this with some of the other pitching staffs around the league (or the type of rotation we started 2007 with), and most teams have this sort of situation. And whatever JP's misgivings are, we can at least rely on Moneyball tactics to fine one guy to fill this rather undemanding role.
Ok, so what I think comes across from all this is that without Marcum a) its going to be hard to predict what our pitching staff will be like next year, b) possible outcomes, in my opinion, range from an above average starting rotation (albeit not the dominant 2008 ptichng staff) in the optimistic scenerio, but no worse than an average starting rotation even if most guys stumble a little.
However, if we were to throw a decent free agent pitcher into the equation, I'd say the range of possibilities is restored to pre-Tommy-John-Marcum standing. By this, I mean that, like before the injury, our pitching staff would range from excellent if things work out very well to above average even if we get a reasonable amount of setbacks.
The problem is that getting Free Agents is harder than it seems, especailly for a small market team like Toronto. I have a theory that GM's shouldn't be judged very harshly on FA contracts that are too high; because if you're just offering Fair Market Value for someone, you probably won't get them unless their wife is from the city or something like that. Therefore, you have to go into FA bidding knowing that you're going to have overpay to get somebody. Its better to pre-understand that every FA contract (for a FA with a substantial amount of interst, anyway) is going to look bad compared to other contracts, and that the 20-40% difference (or whatever it is) should be written off as the cost of acquiring an asset without giving up another (like via Trade).
But its always easier to make someone stay, than convince them to sign as an FA. I guess the reason for this is that players become accustomed to their team and the city, or maybe that during the period leading up to when they are actually a FA the team offers them a deal that the player figures approaches the amount they would make on the open market, and they say "what the hell" and forgoe a chance at making a few million more because they don't want to move or figure not taking it is a little risky because they could get hurt or that the market could collapse or something. Actually, the Jays have been pretty good at this under later-era JP. So, compared to paying the "FA Premium" for someone else, they might be able to save a little if they throw a big contract at AJ Burnett before he opts out.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think they'll get much of a discount for AJ. Probably our offer would at least have to approach (by this I mean be within 5-7 million or so) what AJ (and his Agent) figures will be the probable offer from the Yankees or the Cubs or whoever. You'd still be playing the FA Premium and giving what would likely be considered a bad contract, but this would be our only chance to target someone who would want to play in Toronto for an amount around what anyone else would pay, rather than most other guys whom we would have to pay significantly over this amount.
I think AJ would want to stay in Toronto, just as long as its not costing him 10 million or anything like that. A lot has changed since everyone booed him off the mound (at a game I was at, although I didn't boo; as a rule I find it hard to justify booing pitchers), and he seemed to genuinely respond to what seems like a much friendlier atmosphere these days, both in a dugout that seems to have a lot more fun in the second half of the season, and a fanbase that has slowly but surely picked up on the good vibes. AJ is no lawyer, and generally says what he thinks, and its hard not to hear a change from when he was telling everyone he wanted to play for the Cubs to his more recent comments. He seems to have a lot of fun with the rest of the team. Also, if its success he's after, given that Boston, Tampa, Anaheim, and CWS all have very strong Starting Rotations and thus probably aren't going to put in much of a push for him. I guess I'd throw the Cubs in that group too, although who knows what's happening in the NL. More likely, the big contract he's looking at is with the Yankees, and do the 2009 Yankees really look that better than the 2009 Blue Jays?
I think, when you look at the 2009 rotation issues above, finding a way to retain AJ really would solve a lot of the questions. Its going to be hard to admit, but at least in the last couple months, AJ has been even more reliable than Doc. He's defintely the protypical "could put together a 'Perfect Storm' season" and win a Cy in any given year. If we keep him for another 4 or 5 years, we might get 2 or 3 stinkers, but I bet we get a couple 2008-ish years too, and maybe even a dominant year. He's not Pedro, but he's (probably) not Zito either.
Then, think about 2010, if Marcum comes back at full strength. We had the best pitching in baseball this year, and only Halladay strung it together for the full year. Burnett got better as the year went on, but had more than his fair share of horrible starts (inflating his ERA, which seems unfairly high for the type of season he had). With Marcum, we got an evolution of Good Marcum - Great Marcum - Hurt Elbow - Mediocre Marcum - Strange AAA demotion - Great Marcum - Tommy John Surgery. Litsch similarly went through a few phases; Great Litsch who was talked about as an Allstar - slow turn into Terrible Litsch - AAA demotion - New Great Litsch. I don't even remember what McGowan was doing, but he's continuing to improve, and is completely unhittable sometimes. Definitely a very intimidating rotation.
Friday, September 19, 2008
C'mon Mats, We're Good Guys
After a summer of exchanging flirty eyes around the office, Mats Sundin has officially decided to get his loving from someone other than the Montreal Canadiens.
Its too bad, Mats. Its your decision to make, but we would have made a great couple. We would have been the perfect couple.
We're a trailblazing young upstart brimming with confidence after coming off some big success. Our biggest need is something to guarantee that we keep our momentum going. Having you on our arm would have convinced everyone, including ourselves, that we have all the tools to move in permanently with all the big swingers. We're young, and we have real talent, bright eyes, and big dreams. However, we're no sure thing at this point, but with you we would be. It'd be the best ride you'd ever been on.
You're a living legacy still at the top of your game, just like you have been for years. Only, the difference is you can't bide your time anymore. Your only play here is to go all-in with the best young stud you fit with. You can still be the alpha dog, the big name, the trump card, and the best player. Lets face it, you were never good enough to do it all by yourself. But don't be sad, very few can. You're great, but no one is going to remember anything that special. But if we teamed up, and it worked, that would be something no one would ever forget.
But, you're going to pick someone else. The Toronto Maple Leafs were once real power-players, but have been jokes around here for a long time. If you stay, all you're going to be doing is cementing that you're the type who goes down with the ship. Sounds intriguing, but anyone who's been around as long as you have knows there's no glory in that.
The New York Rangers may wear the most expensive suits around here, but look, those suits don't even look very good, do they? It's all show, no substance. Drury, Gomez, Redden, Markus Naslund? Are you kidding me? Lundqvist is the only blue chipper, and its not like he's all that specail. You can do better than this, don't be fooled by those suits. We've got nice enough clothes, and all the real talent.
But I guess it didn't work out. Well, we might not be a sure thing, but we were your best shot. I guess we'll take our chances with Robert Lang. Its not quite the entrance we wanted to make, but we'll end up doing fine. Will you??
Its too bad, Mats. Its your decision to make, but we would have made a great couple. We would have been the perfect couple.
We're a trailblazing young upstart brimming with confidence after coming off some big success. Our biggest need is something to guarantee that we keep our momentum going. Having you on our arm would have convinced everyone, including ourselves, that we have all the tools to move in permanently with all the big swingers. We're young, and we have real talent, bright eyes, and big dreams. However, we're no sure thing at this point, but with you we would be. It'd be the best ride you'd ever been on.
You're a living legacy still at the top of your game, just like you have been for years. Only, the difference is you can't bide your time anymore. Your only play here is to go all-in with the best young stud you fit with. You can still be the alpha dog, the big name, the trump card, and the best player. Lets face it, you were never good enough to do it all by yourself. But don't be sad, very few can. You're great, but no one is going to remember anything that special. But if we teamed up, and it worked, that would be something no one would ever forget.
But, you're going to pick someone else. The Toronto Maple Leafs were once real power-players, but have been jokes around here for a long time. If you stay, all you're going to be doing is cementing that you're the type who goes down with the ship. Sounds intriguing, but anyone who's been around as long as you have knows there's no glory in that.
The New York Rangers may wear the most expensive suits around here, but look, those suits don't even look very good, do they? It's all show, no substance. Drury, Gomez, Redden, Markus Naslund? Are you kidding me? Lundqvist is the only blue chipper, and its not like he's all that specail. You can do better than this, don't be fooled by those suits. We've got nice enough clothes, and all the real talent.
But I guess it didn't work out. Well, we might not be a sure thing, but we were your best shot. I guess we'll take our chances with Robert Lang. Its not quite the entrance we wanted to make, but we'll end up doing fine. Will you??
Blue Jays sign on for another year of the Initial Era
I was among the first to think that, like two lovers who had some good times but realized it wasn't going anywhere important, it was a good idea for JP Ricchardi and the Blue Jays to finally part ways.
Much like everyone else, I don't like JP personally. He seems like an enormously horrible person to have to spend any time with. He seems arrogant and vindictive, and the way he presents himself, talks down to people, creates dumb little controversies, and even the way he looks is enough to make anyone's blood curdle a little bit. He's not even on a level with a sleazy heel who mobilizes good guys against him in a good movie; he's much more like one of those annoying, obnoxious minor TV characters who's meant to get in the way and frustrate the good guys. I'm thinking less Tim Roth in Rob Roy, and more one of those by-the-book eggheads at CTU who keeps stepping on Jack Bauer's toes.
But that's not why I wanted to see him go. Even if one can argue Sports does sometimes resemble a Popularity Contest, its not like that for me. Especially with management. Rather, I wanted the Jays and JP to part because the JP era in Toronto just seemed to suffer from bad luck.
Even the decisions that turned out really bad, in hindsight, only really seem like bad decisions with hindsight. Reed Johnson? We had too many outfielders, and we just picked the wrong one to get rid of. Frank Thomas? Hey, if you want a big slugger from the FA pool, you're probably going to have to overpay, and he was maybe our best hitter in 2007. But sometimes, shaking things up can just change your luck a little. So, I looked at getting rid of JP like hitting some sort of Karma-Reset button.
I never thought he had done a horrible job, and I always believed the Blue Jays were better than they seemed, but was beginning to doubt whether they would ever preform to that level.
However, after Cito Gaston took over, they've been near the very top of the AL. The majority of that 10 game win streak occurred when we thought our playoff chances were done (we sort of fought our way back into longshot-position after we swept Tampa), and had some really lucky wins. But even if you don't factor in our amazing September, we were right up there with the Red Sox, Angels, and Rays in July, August and parts of June.
This is what changed things for me in terms of the JP issue. At some point - actually, it was a fairly blunt point, when Cito took over from Gibbons - we changed from an underachieving midlevel team to a very good team.
They're not the youngest team in the world, but they don't have any key players that are old, and they do have a lot of young players. In fact, we have a core of players that should be in their peak years (Halladay, Burnett, Wells, BJ Ryan), some players that are fairly new (Marcum, Litsch, McGowan, Lind, Snider, our bullpen), and a lot of guys that fit in between those two extremes. Our pitching staff can throw down with anyone over the next few years, and we have enough bats to complement them.
In fact, I'd say the Blue Jays are a pretty good team with a pretty good future. JP built them. Of course, in the AL East, we can never go into a season expecting a playoff spot, but I think we have the guns to swing with anyone. The obvious answer here is to stay the course.
Much like everyone else, I don't like JP personally. He seems like an enormously horrible person to have to spend any time with. He seems arrogant and vindictive, and the way he presents himself, talks down to people, creates dumb little controversies, and even the way he looks is enough to make anyone's blood curdle a little bit. He's not even on a level with a sleazy heel who mobilizes good guys against him in a good movie; he's much more like one of those annoying, obnoxious minor TV characters who's meant to get in the way and frustrate the good guys. I'm thinking less Tim Roth in Rob Roy, and more one of those by-the-book eggheads at CTU who keeps stepping on Jack Bauer's toes.
But that's not why I wanted to see him go. Even if one can argue Sports does sometimes resemble a Popularity Contest, its not like that for me. Especially with management. Rather, I wanted the Jays and JP to part because the JP era in Toronto just seemed to suffer from bad luck.
Even the decisions that turned out really bad, in hindsight, only really seem like bad decisions with hindsight. Reed Johnson? We had too many outfielders, and we just picked the wrong one to get rid of. Frank Thomas? Hey, if you want a big slugger from the FA pool, you're probably going to have to overpay, and he was maybe our best hitter in 2007. But sometimes, shaking things up can just change your luck a little. So, I looked at getting rid of JP like hitting some sort of Karma-Reset button.
I never thought he had done a horrible job, and I always believed the Blue Jays were better than they seemed, but was beginning to doubt whether they would ever preform to that level.
However, after Cito Gaston took over, they've been near the very top of the AL. The majority of that 10 game win streak occurred when we thought our playoff chances were done (we sort of fought our way back into longshot-position after we swept Tampa), and had some really lucky wins. But even if you don't factor in our amazing September, we were right up there with the Red Sox, Angels, and Rays in July, August and parts of June.
This is what changed things for me in terms of the JP issue. At some point - actually, it was a fairly blunt point, when Cito took over from Gibbons - we changed from an underachieving midlevel team to a very good team.
They're not the youngest team in the world, but they don't have any key players that are old, and they do have a lot of young players. In fact, we have a core of players that should be in their peak years (Halladay, Burnett, Wells, BJ Ryan), some players that are fairly new (Marcum, Litsch, McGowan, Lind, Snider, our bullpen), and a lot of guys that fit in between those two extremes. Our pitching staff can throw down with anyone over the next few years, and we have enough bats to complement them.
In fact, I'd say the Blue Jays are a pretty good team with a pretty good future. JP built them. Of course, in the AL East, we can never go into a season expecting a playoff spot, but I think we have the guns to swing with anyone. The obvious answer here is to stay the course.
Sunday, August 17, 2008
2008 Blue Jays
I'm watching the Blue Jays absolutely clobber the World Serious Champs and current Wild Card leaders, the Boston Red Sox. While I'm not about to suggest the playoffs are within grasp, I have to say I've been pretty impressed with this year's edition of the Blue Jays.
The fact of the matter is that, competing with the Red Sox and Yankees huge payrolls and Tampa Bay's massive collection of top-5 Draft picks isn't going to be easy. This division is tough, and the Jays are rolling along a few games over .500. I read somewhere they have the 3rd best record in the league since mid-June or something. Considering that the offense has performed well below expectations all year (finally producing some runs recently, but still no power at all), if we were even a little better offensively and didn't suffer those awful losing streaks early in the year, we'd be right in the thick of it. We wouldn't even have to be as good as "average" offensively.
Because the Yankees and Red Sox won't let up, I think building this sort of team is the best strategy. All we need is a "perfect storm" season; the type of season where everything works out right. I know its hard to imagine if you're a Blue Jays fan, but they happen sometimes, and we just have to hang around until it happens. Unless we can spend double our payroll, this wait for our opportunity approach is the best we'll be able to muster to be competitive in the AL East.
Here's a position by position run down;
1B - Big hole here with Overbay. He's alright, but unless you're a team that gets all its big production from other positions, Overbay doesn't really cut it here. He can be a decent cog, but unless we're getting our power from other productions, 1B is a logical place to improve.
2B- No complaints with Hill, I just hope he gets healthy by next year. But if not, we do have some depth in the middle infield.
3B - I like Rolen, but there's a pretty big chance he's done. Not good.
SS - Like 2B, we have some depth here. However, that's about all we have. In a great offensive year, I would love to be able to play John MacDonald here, for the purely selfish reason that he's great to watch defensively.
OF - Does the potential of the Lind, Wells, and Rois OF of the future remind anyone of the 80's BJ outfield of George Bell, Lloyd Moseby, and Jesse Barfield. Except making more money, and with 2 Moseby/Barfield players and no one as good as George Bell. But that's still not bad. Wells, despite what people will have you believe, has actually been pretty good this year when he's been playing (the .310, 35 HR Wells is too much to hope for, He's probably more of a .290 and 25HR guy, which is fine for a Gold Glove CF). People also have Rios all wrong; although his effort sort of sucks sometimes, and his power this year has been bad, we need to stop expecting him to be a big masher. I think because he's gone on a few HR runs over the last few years, we expect this to be the norm. We should think of him as a great #2 hitter in the Carl Crawford mold who can scare you with occasional power. Lind is prime to take a step back next year, but at least we know he can hit. And Travis Snider is on the way.
SP - No complaints even if AJ leaves. If he stays we're set, but he won't. Still, Halladay is amazing, Marcum looks for real, and between McGowan, Litsch, Purcey, Jansen, and whoever else, we have at least an average supporting cast for a while. However, things change very quickly with pitching, so who knows.
RP - Pretty good and pretty young. Again, things change quickly, but there are enough horses to go to war with here.
The fact of the matter is that, competing with the Red Sox and Yankees huge payrolls and Tampa Bay's massive collection of top-5 Draft picks isn't going to be easy. This division is tough, and the Jays are rolling along a few games over .500. I read somewhere they have the 3rd best record in the league since mid-June or something. Considering that the offense has performed well below expectations all year (finally producing some runs recently, but still no power at all), if we were even a little better offensively and didn't suffer those awful losing streaks early in the year, we'd be right in the thick of it. We wouldn't even have to be as good as "average" offensively.
Because the Yankees and Red Sox won't let up, I think building this sort of team is the best strategy. All we need is a "perfect storm" season; the type of season where everything works out right. I know its hard to imagine if you're a Blue Jays fan, but they happen sometimes, and we just have to hang around until it happens. Unless we can spend double our payroll, this wait for our opportunity approach is the best we'll be able to muster to be competitive in the AL East.
Here's a position by position run down;
1B - Big hole here with Overbay. He's alright, but unless you're a team that gets all its big production from other positions, Overbay doesn't really cut it here. He can be a decent cog, but unless we're getting our power from other productions, 1B is a logical place to improve.
2B- No complaints with Hill, I just hope he gets healthy by next year. But if not, we do have some depth in the middle infield.
3B - I like Rolen, but there's a pretty big chance he's done. Not good.
SS - Like 2B, we have some depth here. However, that's about all we have. In a great offensive year, I would love to be able to play John MacDonald here, for the purely selfish reason that he's great to watch defensively.
OF - Does the potential of the Lind, Wells, and Rois OF of the future remind anyone of the 80's BJ outfield of George Bell, Lloyd Moseby, and Jesse Barfield. Except making more money, and with 2 Moseby/Barfield players and no one as good as George Bell. But that's still not bad. Wells, despite what people will have you believe, has actually been pretty good this year when he's been playing (the .310, 35 HR Wells is too much to hope for, He's probably more of a .290 and 25HR guy, which is fine for a Gold Glove CF). People also have Rios all wrong; although his effort sort of sucks sometimes, and his power this year has been bad, we need to stop expecting him to be a big masher. I think because he's gone on a few HR runs over the last few years, we expect this to be the norm. We should think of him as a great #2 hitter in the Carl Crawford mold who can scare you with occasional power. Lind is prime to take a step back next year, but at least we know he can hit. And Travis Snider is on the way.
SP - No complaints even if AJ leaves. If he stays we're set, but he won't. Still, Halladay is amazing, Marcum looks for real, and between McGowan, Litsch, Purcey, Jansen, and whoever else, we have at least an average supporting cast for a while. However, things change very quickly with pitching, so who knows.
RP - Pretty good and pretty young. Again, things change quickly, but there are enough horses to go to war with here.
Sunday, June 15, 2008
National Bizarre Association
What is going on in the NBA??
Honestly, I love the sport and count myself as a true NBA fan. But the league has gotten seriously loopy. It's at the point where almost nothing makes sense to me anymore.
A court doesn't already have to prove these accusations true. On an aside, this is the most irritating thing about most of the opinion-media in sports; when they say he's innocent until proven guilty. That's true, but its only true in the court of law. This isn't the court of law, this is the court of public opinion. I don't need proof beyond a reasonable doubt and I don't need to give anyone a presumption of innocence. Neither does the media. And there's good reason for this diverging level of fairness in the courts and the public/media. In the courts, someone could be found liable and made to face legal consequences, and thus the system has to be careful about being unfair because there's real consequences. But when the only consequence is the minor slandering of reputation that would happen anyway by virtue of the information being released, we don't need this. The media has to stop thinking of themselves as some moral court. Everyone realizes its just an opinion, they shouldn't have to be so careful about it. Plus, saying someone is innocent because you can't prove their guilty is a cop out and a line of argument that could be used for anything; its a really hard burden.
So when a game has such a crazy result, and an actual NBA official alleges other officials fixed the game and talked to him about it, and allowing that this person has an awful reputation, I don't see why its so dismissed. I don't buy into conspiracy theories generally, but i think the evidence adds up pretty good for this one. And I'm not a court and I'm not sending David Stern to jail, so I don't see why its irresponsible for anyone to speculate that there probably is some truth to the allegations.
Honestly, I love the sport and count myself as a true NBA fan. But the league has gotten seriously loopy. It's at the point where almost nothing makes sense to me anymore.
- I don't have a hard time believing Donaghy's accusations at all. I also can't believe how dismissive the press has been of this, especially considering how many of these wild accusations end up being true. It's not like he went straight to the press or coming out with a book. He filed this thing in court (for some reason). Not that everything filed in court has to be true, but its not like he's ranting angrily on a call in show or anything. A lawyer must have approved of this at some point.
A court doesn't already have to prove these accusations true. On an aside, this is the most irritating thing about most of the opinion-media in sports; when they say he's innocent until proven guilty. That's true, but its only true in the court of law. This isn't the court of law, this is the court of public opinion. I don't need proof beyond a reasonable doubt and I don't need to give anyone a presumption of innocence. Neither does the media. And there's good reason for this diverging level of fairness in the courts and the public/media. In the courts, someone could be found liable and made to face legal consequences, and thus the system has to be careful about being unfair because there's real consequences. But when the only consequence is the minor slandering of reputation that would happen anyway by virtue of the information being released, we don't need this. The media has to stop thinking of themselves as some moral court. Everyone realizes its just an opinion, they shouldn't have to be so careful about it. Plus, saying someone is innocent because you can't prove their guilty is a cop out and a line of argument that could be used for anything; its a really hard burden.
So when a game has such a crazy result, and an actual NBA official alleges other officials fixed the game and talked to him about it, and allowing that this person has an awful reputation, I don't see why its so dismissed. I don't buy into conspiracy theories generally, but i think the evidence adds up pretty good for this one. And I'm not a court and I'm not sending David Stern to jail, so I don't see why its irresponsible for anyone to speculate that there probably is some truth to the allegations.
- The Pau Gasol trade continues to baffle me. I think there is certainly a smell when, in a league where conspiracy theories are so justifiably rampant, a team sells off a player for well under market value to the league's marquee franchise. The KG trade was fishy too, especially since there were way better offers in the first bidding war. Then somehow Boston came back with a lesser offer months later with no competitors. But, I really don't get at all how the league could meddle in trades. Its much harder to believe than the refereeing (especially the plausible way described by Donaghy). The ref thing could, theoretically, all take place under the table (the league wouldn't necessarily have to say anything directly to the refs, or say anything at all for that matter). Rigging trades, on the other hand, would seem to require a direct conspiracy.
- How is Steve Kerr not yet been killed yet? The guy seems like a wrecking ball of a GM. He had a core of Nash, Marion, Amare with a good supporting cast and a visionary head coach perfectly suited to the team. Then he replaced Marion with Shaq, who ruined everything. Then he got rid of the coach for a guy who was fired by the freaking Bucks. They were in first place last year before the Shaq trade. They could easily not make the playoffs next year. What a disaster. And each of these moves is indefensible at the time it was made. And they're all moves where he's just hiring/trading for his old friends. But Kerr just gets the treatment of a gutsy executive taking worthwhile risks that didn't work out. It's bizarre. Well, until you realize that he's an all around good guy who knows everyone in the media. In reality, he has Isiah Thomas potential, except he's not hated, so he hasn't gotten lampooned yet.
- Speaking of Shawn Marion, I'm not one of those crazy Raptors fans who thinks TJ Ford would snare someone like Marion; but if they put together a package of Ford, and two of Anthony Parker, Andrea, Rasho, and Jamario Moon (Ok, not if the two where Rasho and Moon), the Heat would HAVE to listen, right? But he'd fit into the system perfectly (Jose Calderon, Chris Bosh, and Marion would be the perfect East coast version of Nash, Amare and Marion, and this could really work in the East). Bryan Colangelo was the guy who built the original Phoenix model we're copying, so he likely has a soft spot for Marion. And while you have to put me in the camp of thinking Colangelo might be a tad overrated and not quite the saviour to the Raptors everyone thinks he is, the one incredible talent he has is producing effective depth guys out of nowhere. Really, as long as we keep Jose and Bosh, we could give up anyone else from our roster, and I have faith Colangelo will replace them without missing a step with some unknown from god knows where. Of course, why would Marion ever want to go to Toronto, especially when he was trying to get away from that sort of team in the first place. But still, it would be perfect if it worked.
Monday, June 2, 2008
Derek Fisher is such a great guy, he would never commit a foul, and Joey Crawford is such a class act that he would never call an inappropriate foul
I read about 4 or 5 major sports articles on the Game 4 no-call on Brent Barry after Derek Fisher fell into him. The basic jist of each article was "yes, technically it was a foul, but [insert some absurd rationalization] not calling it a foul was the correct call".
First of all, it was a foul. Fisher fell right on top of him. Ran right into them. Berry had to go home and take a pregnancy test. The refs might be excused late in some important games to let some contact go on a final shot, but this leniency would never exclude calling such an obvious and egregious foul. Of course it wasn't a shooting foul, it was a foul on the floor, which would have nevertheless resulted in a chance for 2 game tying free throws.
Secondly, why is everyone drinking the NBA Kook-Aid and buying that it shouldn't have been called for some reason. I'm notoriously anti-conspiracy theory, but you don't really need one here; the ref had a personal vendetta against the main player on the other team, evidenced by a very insane public meltdown. Why he's working the game I have no idea, and its suspicious to say the least, but apart from any conspiracy theories, when a ref with such a publicized personal vendetta makes such an insanely obvious non-call, why does the media excuse this call? This is especailly perplexing when they have bend over backwards to invent some bizarre rationalization about why this obvious fould shouldn't have been called.
Final Note: I had enough of reading that Berry, Greg Popovich, and Tim Duncan agreed there shouldn't have been a call. Of course they didn't agree; they said they agreed because the call couldn't be changed, and its best for the team not to dwell on it or have a media circus around the issue.
First of all, it was a foul. Fisher fell right on top of him. Ran right into them. Berry had to go home and take a pregnancy test. The refs might be excused late in some important games to let some contact go on a final shot, but this leniency would never exclude calling such an obvious and egregious foul. Of course it wasn't a shooting foul, it was a foul on the floor, which would have nevertheless resulted in a chance for 2 game tying free throws.
Secondly, why is everyone drinking the NBA Kook-Aid and buying that it shouldn't have been called for some reason. I'm notoriously anti-conspiracy theory, but you don't really need one here; the ref had a personal vendetta against the main player on the other team, evidenced by a very insane public meltdown. Why he's working the game I have no idea, and its suspicious to say the least, but apart from any conspiracy theories, when a ref with such a publicized personal vendetta makes such an insanely obvious non-call, why does the media excuse this call? This is especailly perplexing when they have bend over backwards to invent some bizarre rationalization about why this obvious fould shouldn't have been called.
Final Note: I had enough of reading that Berry, Greg Popovich, and Tim Duncan agreed there shouldn't have been a call. Of course they didn't agree; they said they agreed because the call couldn't be changed, and its best for the team not to dwell on it or have a media circus around the issue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)