The Las Vegas A's, Scherzer gets the boot, MadBum gets the Red Ass, Manfred does Manfred things, NBC's union-busting, and I write too few words about Rickey and a LOT of words about Twitter
I somehow got a cassette tape of that when I was 14 or 15 and I wore it out. I can probably recite the whole of Side 1 of that album if you give me a few minutes.
A couple of the Firesign Theater classic albums got 5 outta 5 stars from Rolling Stone reviewers back when I was an impressionable teen in the 80s. That was enough to get me to buy a couple of the albums, and some of the group's lines are burned so deep in my lizard brain that it feels like I came up with them myself: "I never lie, and I'm always right;" "I'm not a drinking man on duty;" "More coffee, warden?" and "...those traitors at Communist Martyrs High School!"
Considering he is the best known character they ever created, Signore Rococco made exactly ZERO appearances on "Don't Crush that Dwarf/Hand me the Pliers" and "Everything You Know is Wrong." So I only knew him from Madison fast-food pizza....
(I can hear their voices and the sound fx from that seen as I read what you wrote there. I don't know you well enough to hate you for awakening those sounds in my memory, but I will hold it against you until they get replaced!!! ;-)
I hear that and I thought about that. But I really have a hard time leaving out one of the 2-3 people who have an argument for being the greatest pitcher of all time. Same with Bonds. Same with Ty Cobb. In a deeper book I'd feel comfortable contending with all of that stuff, but yikes, it's hard to tell an honest, basic history of baseball without including its best players.
It's rough, yeah. As for Cobb: the Stump stuff is all wrong, but he did commit multiple assaults/battery on relatively defenseless people, including the disabled guy which led to the famous suspension/Tigers boycott.
I might, too, especially if I didn't have to rationalize who didn't make it in the forward. The giant improvement midway through his career shows who he would have been without PEDs. If I had to explain why he's not there I'd just say something like "there were too many players starting with 'C' already."
It's not "The BEST Baseball Players", it's "LEGENDS of Baseball". Players with stories; players of near mythical stature. Players where you look at their stats and go "WOW! They did that?!?!?"
First of all, A’s ownership can sit on a chocolate doughnut in their expensive suits.
Second, all those WS rings did a lot of image whitewash for MadBum. Away from all that winning, it is easier to notice things. By things, I mean the racism.
Well with flat tires all they would do is fire their poor driver. This way everyone gets to think they pooped their pants until someone enlightens them. Juvenile but satisfying.
Losing MadBum’s pitching was painful as a Giants fan. Not having to excuse away his shittiness (which, yeah, probably shouldn’t have, but sports) was blessed relief.
Lost in the A’s to Vegas sauce is that Portland gets Effed again. The only consolation is that only the most naïve MLB to PDX boosters didn’t see it coming; we knew we were a stalking horse for Vegas from the jump. Still stings, though. That M’s / A’s regional rivalry would have ruled.
Yeah that was so dumb. At least it's pretty guaranteed Seattle gets one of the next expansion NBA franchises, or if one moves it will move there. Hope it's expansion though.
As a Warriors fan, I’m more or less neutral on the Sonics’ move except for the fan base. Moving franchises really blows.
I’m still over proud of the Giants for actually paying for their own ballpark. I wish MLB had forced that model; it’d separate out the owners who actually care about their teams and communities.
If Scherzer is suspended, the Mets can't replace him. Which seems like an unnecessary punishment on top of something that already feels unnecessary. I just don't know what got MLB so worked up about "illegal substances" in the first place. Anyway, going to guess that Scherzer will be suspended, and will appeal, and will win the appeal.
Beyond that, the Mets still managed to win. They are now 5-1 on the west coast swing, have taken all but one series in April, and are doing with a roster than can't hit, a broken rotation, and a patched together bullpen. If just one guy besides Nimmo and Alonso catches fire, if they can hold on till Verlander is back, they might actually be good.
Oakland once had pro teams in all four major sports. The hockey team died long ago so we can ignore it, but it's still sad that all its teams will be gone. I applaud the government of Oakland for not giving into blackmail, but that doesn't make it any easier for the fans who live there. Though the departure that seems the worst is the Warriors moving across the bay. The owners of that team paid for the Chase Center themselves. They could have easily done that in Oakland, and chose to leave anyway. I think because they is more money to be made in affluent and white San Francisco. It's all shameful.
Why should a team NOT be penalized if a player cheats and only gave the player bear the cost? Suspension for off field issues is different but I think it only fair that when a team stands to benefit it also needs to share the costs.
Business act by the employees 100% of the time. A manager at NBC tries to illegally break the union and only the manager gets punished? No, of course not.
If I had the power to unilaterally make the rules, I'd have a team missing a player for PEDs likewise play with a reduced roster.
But there is a difference in the two that is rational and allows different treatment: too much sticky stuff happens only in the presence of team officials while use of steroids and hGH does not.
Agreed - he should not be. The team didn’t cheat, but they employed the player who did.
I’ve been advocating for this in hockey for years, and it’s a better example for why this would be worthwhile. Teams still continue to play guys who head-hunt, or hit from behind, or go after guys’ knees. If they get suspended, the team just dresses someone else, and suffers very little as a result. But if your 10-game suspension means that your team has to dress a player short for 10 games, won’t your team think twice about signing that type of player next time? How will your teammates feel about it? Everyone playing extra shifts for a game might be fine, but by game five, you’re starting to run the other guys ragged - think there might be some peer pressure to get your ish together?
Assuming Scherzer gets suspended, which seems inevitable, the Mets will be down 4 of their planned 5 man rotation. What team has 4 extra major league quality starting pitchers lying around as spares?
-- I saw "the Cuzzi on-field spectrometer" open at Wembley
-- MLB is *still* and continuously demonizing its star players. Manfred wants to both shorten / reduce salaries AND empower umps to throw players out of games if the ump "credibly suspects the player has used PEDs." This initiative is going to target Mike Trout, who obviously, well, ya know.
I commend MLB for enforcing rules and trying to level the playing field (pun not intended). It's clear there were some pitchers who were CHEATING, gaining an unfair advantage which sticky substances which created high spin rates.
At the same time, while I haven't looked at this one closely, my guess is where Scherzer was cheating, if we applied the Cuzzi-Scherzer standard for foreign substances we'd have multiple ejections every day and no one wants that.
Yeah I followed that Warriors BS move.. I'm a huge fan of the city of Oakland (I wrote about that just now in my standalone comment) and that one is really more evil in some ways, including what you've said..
You need to get out into the surrounding counties for larger white proportions, and even then you should separate the white and "other races" by their Hispanic/non-Hispanic component to get a better idea of the true demographics of the area.
That said, in the hey day of recent Oakland teams, when Jason Giambi was here, the crowd was well and truly mixed in Oakland,. Once AT & T was built (Pacbell originally) the decline in Oakland attendance really accelerated.
Last night’s loss was the 400th regular-season loss for Davey Martinez. He’s now 326-400, which - even with a miraculous championship run in 2019 - means that he’s a 73-89 manager over his Nats career. Woof.
PS My fun fact: “Manic Monday” by the Bangles was actually written by Prince. If you listen it totally makes sense. (I refuse to look at my Twitter stats.)
PPS Setting aside (and in no way minimizing) the massive injustice for Oakland - is Vegas even capable of supporting a team for 81 games a year? Also, I am irritated that I will have to travel to Vegas in order to keep my collection of MLB stadiums intact.
I remember what it was like the years the Mets were stuck with a Triple A team in Vegas. All the hitters looked like Aaron Judge, all the pitchers looked like Qorbin. Not the best way to handle your minor leaguers at all.
I suspect also the Golden Knights, as an expansion team, were a fresh slate instead of warmed over sad leftovers. I guess busting fans might travel, but more likely they'll use the road trip as an excuse for seeing Vegas itself because they don't want to actually buy tickets to see their own team blow out an As team that has little talent and plays like butt.
I think so. It's less so than it was, but they've got the Tampa Bay problem. Everyone there is a transplant. Sure, if I retired there I'd go when my Twins were in town but that would be it.
VGK have also managed to produce a winning team from the get go -- making the playoffs the first three years and a winning record in the 4th. The team is also in just its 5th season two of which were impacted by the pandemic. They also had ZERO competition for big league sports.
The NFL model of one game per week, usually on Sunday afternoons, means fans of both the Raiders and visiting teams can fly in for a weekend to catch a game.
I'm sure the novelty effect of both the team and the stadium will result in a good turnout the first few years. But if the A's keep running on shoestring budget and putting a crappy product on the field, people are going to lose interest fast. Haven't looked but I assume they're building an enclosed stadium that they can air condition in the summer, which is a necessity in Vegas for major leagues, but also indoor baseball sucks most of the year, saying that as someone who spent many years going to the Kingdome.
And beyond that the economics of the city suck. They're competing with two major sports for sponsorship dollars, a hundred other things to do in town, and I have to imagine tons of service workers who might check out a triple-A game cheap but won't/can't spend major league prices. I'm making a lot of assumptions here and I assume A's ownership and MLB have done their homework, but feels like the business is simply extorting money from the city and state and not producing a quality product that draws fans.
I know the city embraced the Knights as the first team there, who then made the finals in their first year, plus I think the team played a role in Vegas coping after the attack on the concert (like how the Bosox did after the marathon bombing). It was sort of a lightning in a bottle deal.
Yeah, Vegas has done well with and by the Knights. But, as you'll recall, the Knights did very well by Vegas, starting with the way the team rallied in the wake of the music festival shooting at the beginning of their inaugural season, and ending with their story-book run at the Stanley Cup, the kind of run that is unprecedented for expansion teams in any major sport.
And my fun fact is the Christmas stylings of Mannheim Steamroller were written by the same guy, Chip Davis, that wrote Convoy by C.W. McCall a character created for a midwest bread company with accompanying jingles by Davis.
Do the owners have to vote to approve the move? Sounds like Manfred is backing it, so maybe that's a foregone conclusion. But Las Vegas had to be considered the home market for some team. Maybe multiple teams, like Iowa, infamously. So somebody would be losing part of their market and might be opposed.
I think there may be some sort of vote of approval but it'll be a rubber stamp. There is no conflicting territory, however, so no team gets a veto. There is a difference between the TV markets, which cause the Iowa/Vegas/Hawaii/North Carolina blackouts and the Team Territory stuff, such as why the Giants could keep the A's from moving to San Jose.
The "good" news here is if the current Oakland TV market gets absorbed by the Giants the remaining A's fans will likely not be subjected to mlb.tv blackouts.
Prince also wrote "Nothing Compares 2 U" (covered by Sinead O'Connor), "I Feel For You" (covered by Chaka Khan), and "Jungle Love" (for The Time) ... and played synthesizer on "Stand Back" because Stevie Nicks wrote it based on "Little Red Corvette" and wanted his mojo. Man, I wish I saw him live.
Me too - his live version of "Nothing Compares" featuring Rosie Gaines is FIRE.
I remember being a young man and wanting to "make some noise" with Susanna Hoffs - but in hindsight it's absolutely a Prince lyric. [EDIT: Just saw a story that said Prince gave the song to the Bangles because he "wanted a relationship" with Susanna Hoffs. Same, sir, same.]
I guess I assumed he wrote all of The Time's stuff? No?
Asking sincerely, how is Martinez as a manager? He was always seen as a future great manager when he was a Cubs bench coach and seems like he's had a pile of crap in Washington at least the last few years.
I honestly got nothin' - yes, the Nats won a title on his watch in 2019, but only after WAY underachieving in 2018 and stumbling out to a 19-31 start. [You may have heard something about that.] I always felt like the championship was due more to heroic performances - Rendon, Soto, Hendrick, Strasburg, Scherzer, even Qorbin (but only in relief!) rather than quality managing. He tends to overuse (and irritate) his bullpen, sticks with veterans and retreads way too long and he's been terrible with managing younger players. I think a team that isn't for sale (maybe) and cheap (definitely) would have moved on by now.
Baseball managers are notoriously hard to judge because they don't call plays, like in football or basketball (and I presume others sports), and the lack of re-entry. Plus so much of what a baseball manager does happens behind the scenes and with info we aren't privy to as fans; it's about keeping the team optimized for 6 months not trying to win every game.
Because most of the PCL is Coors with AAA pitchers, Tatis put up a ridiculous .515/.590/1.212 slash line. I'm guessing there will be a bit of a Coors-like hangover when pitches actually break on him.
NIMMO doing NIMMO things. He’s having an incredible series.
This doesn’t feel like the Mets of last year yet but they’re finding ways to win. The method of winning though is definitely going to kill a few of Mets twitter off so I’m all in.
The rotation’s age was a fear of mine all through spring training. I thought they should have gone with a six man rotation to lighten the load for the pensioners. The way it’s going, Buck is going to be picking 5 fans from the stands to form his rotation.
If we can split 2 with San Francisco Mets it’ll be a good road trip. If we can steal 3 that would be mega.
A 10 day suspension really only makes you miss 1 start. Drop the appeal the day after he starts, miss his next turn on day 5, then pitch again on day 11.
Hitting a homer isn't really classic Nimmo thing. You could argue it wasn't really a Nimmo doing Nimmo things day because he didn't walk even once!
For me, he sets the tone for the game. If he can force the pitcher to throw 7-8-9 pitches in that first at bat I always think the Mets will hit a lot better as a team
Excellent newsletter today. I feel like I needed more than 1 cup of coffee to get through it all!
I'm sure this stadium will be paid for like everything else in Vegas, with an added hotel room tax. Won't be taking any money out of locals pockets while nickel and diming every tourist who visits.
True. But, like Ticketmaster fees, though people do really hate hotel taxes, they don't hate them enough to refuse to go there (or buy the tickets). So the strategy continues to work for the fee imposers.
True vacations are expensive. But speaking as a (former) regular Vegas visitor, the city has really gone nuts on high charges for limited value especially relative to 10-15 years ago.
I suspect 4 out of 5 people at a gaming table in Vegas recognize the can lose money or that they’ve lost money in the past but don’t EXPECT to lose money.
More to the topic. I paid $190 for two A’s tickets yesterday. That’s a lot but I had great seats (4 rows behind the dugout) and got to see my team play. And was willing to splurge for one game. I’d never pay that for A’s season ticket or even a 10-game plan. I’ve probably been to Vegas 20 times over the past 10 years and never thought about seeing a baseball game except the one time we met my parents for the explicit purpose of seeing the Cubs in Spring Training. That said my friends and I are atypical tourists in Vegas.
Max was watched by an MLB OFFICIAL when he cleaned his hands off. He was also watched by an MLB OFFICIAL when he reapplied the rosin. Neither time did the MLB OFFICIAL say ‘wash them more’ or ‘that’s too much rosin’ or ‘the rosin is not where it should be’. Additionally, the ump who tossed Max is the only ump in MLB to have thrown out anyone for this (3 times). Seems this ump wants to have his name know, perhaps the new Angel Hernandez?
I feel for all of those A's fans, many of who have been dicked around by the Raiders and watched the Warriors cross the bridge to SF. I know a large handful of diehard A's fans. They talk like someone in an abusive relationship who is always hoping things will magically change. And of course Vegas will do great at the gate, like the Golden Knights, because of all of the out of town fans who travel to see their team and spend a couple of days gambling. Sigh. Capitalism.
Get rid of the competitive balance tax and contract length may come down. But then again may not. Avoiding the soft cap is nice. So too is cash flow and future discounts on present value. MLB owners are many things; economically illiterate not included.
Are you implying that the real reason some owners want shorter contracts is that they’re being shown up by their ‘peers’? Spending too much money and making me look like I’m a greedy mofo!
Because if they can hold their player expenses down and other teams can't outspend them, they are more competitive. More wins equals more fans, more beer and brat sales and higher tv revenue. Which means costs go down and revenue goes up. Nice daily double for owners.
Agreed. We had long term contracts before the CBT was such a factor. Deferring money is always a win and why players don't get $50M/season.
The real problem with these deals is we're going to see more and more situations like Pujols and Cabrera where they keep playing long beyond being useful because they have $30M reasons to show up. A shorter contract with higher AAV would "let" them walk away in their late 30s.
When I was an undergrad at The Ohio State University, Hocking Hills State Park was one of my favorite getaways. Loved walking out the flat forest path to discover you were on the edge of a cliff!
I would have Grove over Young. Young started when the mound was 50 feet away and played his entire career with a ball made out of day old oatmeal wrapped in wet newspapers. Grove played his career at the height of the live ball explosion. Grove was dominant in a way that Young never was, leading in ERA and ERA+ 9x each, most of anyone, leading in FIP 8x, second behind Clemens and Walter Johnson's 9, and in bWAR 8x, again most of anyone.
Young was great, of course, but not as dominant as Grove and with reasonable (in my always humble opinion) time line adjustments, Grove was greater.
My flip comment notwithstanding, this is generally my thinking. Young played a fundamentally different game. The only player I have in the book who debuted before 1900 is Honus Wagner.
David Gordon, in his book Baseball Generations, developed a "Career Value Index" to compare players across generations. By his calculations Cy Young comes in at #6 all time at 194 CVI. Babe Ruth tops the charts with 270 CVI. Wagner #11 sits at 172.4. Grove is 15th at 161.4.
It's really an impossible exercise to pick the "top" 28 or top 50 or top 100. I'd make the same argument about Cy Young that you made about Clemente. They literally named the pitching award after him.
At the same time, how to value players who played ~100 years is really hard and for me WAR does a terrible job with this. I'd be fine with a list that only included Ruth from that era, essentially arguing modern players are far, far better than those of long ago. Also probably makes for a better book to talk about players that kids' dads or grandpas saw than legends from a different game.
The book needs a full page photo opposite each description right? How many decent photos even exist for pre-WWII era players? I'm guessing all the good ones already were featured by Ken Burns.
The "minor" leagues were not as well defined in his day, since there were no official affiliations. A pitcher could make a good living pitching well in the International League in the 1920, and Grove presumably did, since he stuck around long enough to win over 100 games there. He pitched in the majors in a much more competitive and offensively skewed time, as opposed to entirely in the Dead Ball era like Young. All of which is just to say that the argument *can* be made...
COMPLETELY OFF-TOPIC QUESTION: There is a commercial in heavy rotation on MLB Network for a business credit card featuring a woman who makes modernized kitchen gadgets and uses the cash back to grow her company ... at one point another woman at a white board turns around and says "like a smart coffee grinder" - and I KNOW she once had a part on a sitcom playing someone's snotty friend/rival/mother-in-law/boss, but I CANNOT place her and it's bothering me (plus I feel bad that she's doing commercial work and such a bit part besides). Can anyone help me?
It looks like the main woman in the commercial is the CEO of the actual company featured. She states on her LinkedIn page that the commercial was filmed at two of the company's locations using team members.
Thank you - the woman I'm talking about is at about 0:24 and I'm pretty sure she's an actress ... and maybe I'm crazy but I feel like I can see her in pearls saying something mean but funny to a perky female lead.
Okay, when I watched the commercial looking for this person, my instant reaction is that she looks like Wendie Malick. I don't think that it is, but it sure looks like her.
Based on your pearls and mean but funny comment, I knew that had to be it. She really does look like her! I would think that Malick doesn't need a small speaking role in a commercial, but if the WGA strike talk lately has taught me anything, it's that people in Hollywood don't necessarily have as much money as you think, unless they are big enough that they have even MORE money than you'd think. (This is going to be my best achievement for the day.)
Can't speak to the commercial or Wendie Malick, but I learned recently that the only reason Mayim Bialik auditioned for The Big Bang Theory is she needed a role to renew her screen actors guild card and thus qualify for their health insurance.
And independent of that a lot actors don't make (or save) nearly as much as we think they do.
Well, it's definitely not her, because Wendie Malick is somehow 72 years old. She played Dr. Pimple Popper on an episode of Seinfeld almost 30 years ago, though I remember her from the HBO show Dream On.
I was going to suggest Linda Fiorentino, though she is also too old to be in a Chase commercial, or at least to be this person in this Chase commercial, since she's 63 now, and that woman in the commercial doesn't look like she's past 40.
Las Vegas Athletics: Something I’ve never understood about the old, old days, is why the perpetually impoverished franchises among the Original Eight in each league were perpetually impoverished: Athletics, Braves, Senators, Browns, to name the first that come to mind. These were not particularly small-market teams in the first half of the last century, yet just about the first thing you learn about any of these franchises is how precarious they always were financially.
You would think, in the abstract, that with the reserve clause, baseball’s greater popularity, and almost no competition from other professional sports (NFL was not a big deal in those days), any franchise would have been a license to print money, but, no. Probably none of these teams, in their original cities, ever really shook off the effects of the Depression followed by WWII, which maybe explains the Thirties and Forties, but the Roaring Twenties?
Revenue streams were basically ticket sales and that's it. Three of those four teams had competing baseball teams in the other league, so that made it tougher. Washington, well, they were usually just poorly run and, really, until the post-war era, D.C. was a relative backwater.
Yes, and the NL teams in the two-team towns were there first. It is interesting to speculate why, in the case of Boston, the newer AL team eventually won out. Perhaps winning the WS four times in seven seasons 1912-1918 gave the Red Sox an enduring glow, because, after WWI, both teams were pretty bad most of the time.
I think I have a SABR book about Boston baseball somewhere. Perhaps I should read it!
The newer AL team won New York as well, even if the departing NL teams were eventually replaced.
It’s interesting that the more established Phillies won Philadelphia, given the A’s won, I think, five or six World Series during their time in Philly, while the Phils were generally in the bottom half of the standings.
I'm a little surprised that Craig, at his age, is aware of Firesign Theatre to the point of knowing that line.
I somehow got a cassette tape of that when I was 14 or 15 and I wore it out. I can probably recite the whole of Side 1 of that album if you give me a few minutes.
A couple of the Firesign Theater classic albums got 5 outta 5 stars from Rolling Stone reviewers back when I was an impressionable teen in the 80s. That was enough to get me to buy a couple of the albums, and some of the group's lines are burned so deep in my lizard brain that it feels like I came up with them myself: "I never lie, and I'm always right;" "I'm not a drinking man on duty;" "More coffee, warden?" and "...those traitors at Communist Martyrs High School!"
“Roll up your arm and bend over.”
Rocky Rococco …
Considering he is the best known character they ever created, Signore Rococco made exactly ZERO appearances on "Don't Crush that Dwarf/Hand me the Pliers" and "Everything You Know is Wrong." So I only knew him from Madison fast-food pizza....
They still in business?
"You want regular or premium?"
"Porgie, come and get it, your clam cakes are getting damp!"
"C-C-Coming, Mother!"
(I can hear their voices and the sound fx from that seen as I read what you wrote there. I don't know you well enough to hate you for awakening those sounds in my memory, but I will hold it against you until they get replaced!!! ;-)
"Don't hear, he can shout you!"
[and by "seen," you all know I meant (and can actually spell) "scene"]
I hear that and I thought about that. But I really have a hard time leaving out one of the 2-3 people who have an argument for being the greatest pitcher of all time. Same with Bonds. Same with Ty Cobb. In a deeper book I'd feel comfortable contending with all of that stuff, but yikes, it's hard to tell an honest, basic history of baseball without including its best players.
It's rough, yeah. As for Cobb: the Stump stuff is all wrong, but he did commit multiple assaults/battery on relatively defenseless people, including the disabled guy which led to the famous suspension/Tigers boycott.
I own a copy of the Stump book. I often wonder if I should just throw it out.
I will read that sooner than later, but I doubt I can walk into a bookstore and ask for a trade-in.
Donate it to a school in Florida
I might, too, especially if I didn't have to rationalize who didn't make it in the forward. The giant improvement midway through his career shows who he would have been without PEDs. If I had to explain why he's not there I'd just say something like "there were too many players starting with 'C' already."
It's not "The BEST Baseball Players", it's "LEGENDS of Baseball". Players with stories; players of near mythical stature. Players where you look at their stats and go "WOW! They did that?!?!?"
Clemens fits that bill.
First of all, A’s ownership can sit on a chocolate doughnut in their expensive suits.
Second, all those WS rings did a lot of image whitewash for MadBum. Away from all that winning, it is easier to notice things. By things, I mean the racism.
This is such an excellent wish for them, so much more fun than I hope they have four flat tires or the other stuff I've seen people say like this.
Lewis Grizzard used to say, "I hope they give birth to 5 liberal Democrats," and ... well ... that hasn't aged well at all.
Well with flat tires all they would do is fire their poor driver. This way everyone gets to think they pooped their pants until someone enlightens them. Juvenile but satisfying.
Oh I just yelled in all caps, myself. I'm uncouth.
Losing MadBum’s pitching was painful as a Giants fan. Not having to excuse away his shittiness (which, yeah, probably shouldn’t have, but sports) was blessed relief.
Lost in the A’s to Vegas sauce is that Portland gets Effed again. The only consolation is that only the most naïve MLB to PDX boosters didn’t see it coming; we knew we were a stalking horse for Vegas from the jump. Still stings, though. That M’s / A’s regional rivalry would have ruled.
Poor Portland. It makes no sense. Although my axe to grind is the Supersonics being moved to the middle of NOWHERE for no good reason, DAVID STERN.
Yeah that was so dumb. At least it's pretty guaranteed Seattle gets one of the next expansion NBA franchises, or if one moves it will move there. Hope it's expansion though.
As a Warriors fan, I’m more or less neutral on the Sonics’ move except for the fan base. Moving franchises really blows.
I’m still over proud of the Giants for actually paying for their own ballpark. I wish MLB had forced that model; it’d separate out the owners who actually care about their teams and communities.
If Scherzer is suspended, the Mets can't replace him. Which seems like an unnecessary punishment on top of something that already feels unnecessary. I just don't know what got MLB so worked up about "illegal substances" in the first place. Anyway, going to guess that Scherzer will be suspended, and will appeal, and will win the appeal.
Beyond that, the Mets still managed to win. They are now 5-1 on the west coast swing, have taken all but one series in April, and are doing with a roster than can't hit, a broken rotation, and a patched together bullpen. If just one guy besides Nimmo and Alonso catches fire, if they can hold on till Verlander is back, they might actually be good.
Oakland once had pro teams in all four major sports. The hockey team died long ago so we can ignore it, but it's still sad that all its teams will be gone. I applaud the government of Oakland for not giving into blackmail, but that doesn't make it any easier for the fans who live there. Though the departure that seems the worst is the Warriors moving across the bay. The owners of that team paid for the Chase Center themselves. They could have easily done that in Oakland, and chose to leave anyway. I think because they is more money to be made in affluent and white San Francisco. It's all shameful.
Why should a team NOT be penalized if a player cheats and only gave the player bear the cost? Suspension for off field issues is different but I think it only fair that when a team stands to benefit it also needs to share the costs.
Did not verify myself, but Dan Gladden said last night that the last 3 ejections for foreign (international?) substance were by Cuzzi.
Shit, I can't even name 5 umpires total.
I can, but Leslie Nielsen sneaks in at about 4.
The team didn't cheat. The player cheated. By this logic, when someone is suspended for steroids, he should also not be replaced.
Business act by the employees 100% of the time. A manager at NBC tries to illegally break the union and only the manager gets punished? No, of course not.
So how is the steroid thing not similarly a business act then? Both are suspensions for violating the rules to gain an advantage.
If I had the power to unilaterally make the rules, I'd have a team missing a player for PEDs likewise play with a reduced roster.
But there is a difference in the two that is rational and allows different treatment: too much sticky stuff happens only in the presence of team officials while use of steroids and hGH does not.
Agreed - he should not be. The team didn’t cheat, but they employed the player who did.
I’ve been advocating for this in hockey for years, and it’s a better example for why this would be worthwhile. Teams still continue to play guys who head-hunt, or hit from behind, or go after guys’ knees. If they get suspended, the team just dresses someone else, and suffers very little as a result. But if your 10-game suspension means that your team has to dress a player short for 10 games, won’t your team think twice about signing that type of player next time? How will your teammates feel about it? Everyone playing extra shifts for a game might be fine, but by game five, you’re starting to run the other guys ragged - think there might be some peer pressure to get your ish together?
shit.
You mean like the King of the slew foot Brad "The Rat, The Pest" Marchand?
Assuming Scherzer gets suspended, which seems inevitable, the Mets will be down 4 of their planned 5 man rotation. What team has 4 extra major league quality starting pitchers lying around as spares?
If they appeal, they can maybe kick the suspension till after Verlander and Carrasco are back.
-- #YankeesfansforMax
-- I saw "the Cuzzi on-field spectrometer" open at Wembley
-- MLB is *still* and continuously demonizing its star players. Manfred wants to both shorten / reduce salaries AND empower umps to throw players out of games if the ump "credibly suspects the player has used PEDs." This initiative is going to target Mike Trout, who obviously, well, ya know.
But it wasn't for Industrial Shithouse, who were serving a 10 game suspension for foreign substances.
[chef's kiss]
I commend MLB for enforcing rules and trying to level the playing field (pun not intended). It's clear there were some pitchers who were CHEATING, gaining an unfair advantage which sticky substances which created high spin rates.
At the same time, while I haven't looked at this one closely, my guess is where Scherzer was cheating, if we applied the Cuzzi-Scherzer standard for foreign substances we'd have multiple ejections every day and no one wants that.
Yeah I followed that Warriors BS move.. I'm a huge fan of the city of Oakland (I wrote about that just now in my standalone comment) and that one is really more evil in some ways, including what you've said..
White SF? Affluent yes. 45% white, 34% Asian, 8% other, 7% mixed. I guess the other 6% is unknown.
Anyway, Oakland is 35% white, 23% black, 17% other, 16% Asian.
You need to get out into the surrounding counties for larger white proportions, and even then you should separate the white and "other races" by their Hispanic/non-Hispanic component to get a better idea of the true demographics of the area.
That said, in the hey day of recent Oakland teams, when Jason Giambi was here, the crowd was well and truly mixed in Oakland,. Once AT & T was built (Pacbell originally) the decline in Oakland attendance really accelerated.
Last night’s loss was the 400th regular-season loss for Davey Martinez. He’s now 326-400, which - even with a miraculous championship run in 2019 - means that he’s a 73-89 manager over his Nats career. Woof.
PS My fun fact: “Manic Monday” by the Bangles was actually written by Prince. If you listen it totally makes sense. (I refuse to look at my Twitter stats.)
PPS Setting aside (and in no way minimizing) the massive injustice for Oakland - is Vegas even capable of supporting a team for 81 games a year? Also, I am irritated that I will have to travel to Vegas in order to keep my collection of MLB stadiums intact.
I remember what it was like the years the Mets were stuck with a Triple A team in Vegas. All the hitters looked like Aaron Judge, all the pitchers looked like Qorbin. Not the best way to handle your minor leaguers at all.
Does this mean Oakland now becomes Vegas' AAA affiliate in a role reversal?
Would be nice justice if Oakland got a higher quality team out of this deal.
As someone who has been following the Rockies on and off for the last 5-6 years I can confirm that the baseball in Denver *is* silly.
Vegas has done well with the Golden Knights. But that is also indoors. Baseball in the desert might be a different matter.
I suspect also the Golden Knights, as an expansion team, were a fresh slate instead of warmed over sad leftovers. I guess busting fans might travel, but more likely they'll use the road trip as an excuse for seeing Vegas itself because they don't want to actually buy tickets to see their own team blow out an As team that has little talent and plays like butt.
Who wants to see the A’s play at this point?
It’s baseball. I want to see baseball.
Plus, growing up on Mike Cubbage / Rob Wilfong Twins then moving south for Andres Thomas / Rick Mahler Braves ... well bad baseball is in my blood.
I just spent a decade watching the Phillies. I am over bad teams. Give me mediocrity at least.
They'll have to rely on fans of visiting teams, I guess.
I think so. It's less so than it was, but they've got the Tampa Bay problem. Everyone there is a transplant. Sure, if I retired there I'd go when my Twins were in town but that would be it.
It’s probably the only reason I’d ever go to Vegas.
I can see myself making the drive from LA when the Astros are in town, it’s nice to have another guaranteed opponent relatively close to home.
Not as nice as the newly available trip to PetCo every other year with the balanced schedule, however.
VGK have also managed to produce a winning team from the get go -- making the playoffs the first three years and a winning record in the 4th. The team is also in just its 5th season two of which were impacted by the pandemic. They also had ZERO competition for big league sports.
The NFL model of one game per week, usually on Sunday afternoons, means fans of both the Raiders and visiting teams can fly in for a weekend to catch a game.
I'm sure the novelty effect of both the team and the stadium will result in a good turnout the first few years. But if the A's keep running on shoestring budget and putting a crappy product on the field, people are going to lose interest fast. Haven't looked but I assume they're building an enclosed stadium that they can air condition in the summer, which is a necessity in Vegas for major leagues, but also indoor baseball sucks most of the year, saying that as someone who spent many years going to the Kingdome.
And beyond that the economics of the city suck. They're competing with two major sports for sponsorship dollars, a hundred other things to do in town, and I have to imagine tons of service workers who might check out a triple-A game cheap but won't/can't spend major league prices. I'm making a lot of assumptions here and I assume A's ownership and MLB have done their homework, but feels like the business is simply extorting money from the city and state and not producing a quality product that draws fans.
Oops, just realized I misread the data on Wikipedia, which was "past 5 years". But they actually have another year of success at the start.
The VGN do well at the gate because of all of the out of town fans there to see whoever the Knights are playing.
And given the new scheduling model where every team visits every other team at least every other year, that ought to be pretty sustainable.
I thought I saw they also had a small local fan base though? Going by memory on that so might be wrong.
I know the city embraced the Knights as the first team there, who then made the finals in their first year, plus I think the team played a role in Vegas coping after the attack on the concert (like how the Bosox did after the marathon bombing). It was sort of a lightning in a bottle deal.
Not to mention having Boba Fett on their Sweaters does not hurt either!
Yeah, Vegas has done well with and by the Knights. But, as you'll recall, the Knights did very well by Vegas, starting with the way the team rallied in the wake of the music festival shooting at the beginning of their inaugural season, and ending with their story-book run at the Stanley Cup, the kind of run that is unprecedented for expansion teams in any major sport.
So I'm getting the sense that you don't see the As moving to Vegas and magically not playing like butt? Haha.
Vegas summer isn't any worse than Phoenix and they do all right, at least when the team is good. Of course, Phoenix is twice the size of Vegas too.
And my fun fact is the Christmas stylings of Mannheim Steamroller were written by the same guy, Chip Davis, that wrote Convoy by C.W. McCall a character created for a midwest bread company with accompanying jingles by Davis.
Do the owners have to vote to approve the move? Sounds like Manfred is backing it, so maybe that's a foregone conclusion. But Las Vegas had to be considered the home market for some team. Maybe multiple teams, like Iowa, infamously. So somebody would be losing part of their market and might be opposed.
I think there may be some sort of vote of approval but it'll be a rubber stamp. There is no conflicting territory, however, so no team gets a veto. There is a difference between the TV markets, which cause the Iowa/Vegas/Hawaii/North Carolina blackouts and the Team Territory stuff, such as why the Giants could keep the A's from moving to San Jose.
But no doubt A's fans in Oakland - assuming any still stay fans - will not be able to watch Vegas A's games.
The "good" news here is if the current Oakland TV market gets absorbed by the Giants the remaining A's fans will likely not be subjected to mlb.tv blackouts.
Prince also wrote "Nothing Compares 2 U" (covered by Sinead O'Connor), "I Feel For You" (covered by Chaka Khan), and "Jungle Love" (for The Time) ... and played synthesizer on "Stand Back" because Stevie Nicks wrote it based on "Little Red Corvette" and wanted his mojo. Man, I wish I saw him live.
Me too - his live version of "Nothing Compares" featuring Rosie Gaines is FIRE.
I remember being a young man and wanting to "make some noise" with Susanna Hoffs - but in hindsight it's absolutely a Prince lyric. [EDIT: Just saw a story that said Prince gave the song to the Bangles because he "wanted a relationship" with Susanna Hoffs. Same, sir, same.]
I guess I assumed he wrote all of The Time's stuff? No?
Asking sincerely, how is Martinez as a manager? He was always seen as a future great manager when he was a Cubs bench coach and seems like he's had a pile of crap in Washington at least the last few years.
I honestly got nothin' - yes, the Nats won a title on his watch in 2019, but only after WAY underachieving in 2018 and stumbling out to a 19-31 start. [You may have heard something about that.] I always felt like the championship was due more to heroic performances - Rendon, Soto, Hendrick, Strasburg, Scherzer, even Qorbin (but only in relief!) rather than quality managing. He tends to overuse (and irritate) his bullpen, sticks with veterans and retreads way too long and he's been terrible with managing younger players. I think a team that isn't for sale (maybe) and cheap (definitely) would have moved on by now.
Thanks.
Baseball managers are notoriously hard to judge because they don't call plays, like in football or basketball (and I presume others sports), and the lack of re-entry. Plus so much of what a baseball manager does happens behind the scenes and with info we aren't privy to as fans; it's about keeping the team optimized for 6 months not trying to win every game.
Because most of the PCL is Coors with AAA pitchers, Tatis put up a ridiculous .515/.590/1.212 slash line. I'm guessing there will be a bit of a Coors-like hangover when pitches actually break on him.
NIMMO doing NIMMO things. He’s having an incredible series.
This doesn’t feel like the Mets of last year yet but they’re finding ways to win. The method of winning though is definitely going to kill a few of Mets twitter off so I’m all in.
The rotation’s age was a fear of mine all through spring training. I thought they should have gone with a six man rotation to lighten the load for the pensioners. The way it’s going, Buck is going to be picking 5 fans from the stands to form his rotation.
If we can split 2 with San Francisco Mets it’ll be a good road trip. If we can steal 3 that would be mega.
The Nimmo re-signing was so big for this team.
And if Scherzer misses two starts because of the rosin, at least he gets to rest?
It will give another Mets pitcher an opportunity to shut out the Nats. Sharing is caring.
A 10 day suspension really only makes you miss 1 start. Drop the appeal the day after he starts, miss his next turn on day 5, then pitch again on day 11.
Hitting a homer isn't really classic Nimmo thing. You could argue it wasn't really a Nimmo doing Nimmo things day because he didn't walk even once!
I am fine with a Nimmo Does Alonso Things Day once in a while.
True but he’s working hard and getting on base. Just getting better in different ways.
For me, he sets the tone for the game. If he can force the pitcher to throw 7-8-9 pitches in that first at bat I always think the Mets will hit a lot better as a team
Excellent newsletter today. I feel like I needed more than 1 cup of coffee to get through it all!
I'm sure this stadium will be paid for like everything else in Vegas, with an added hotel room tax. Won't be taking any money out of locals pockets while nickel and diming every tourist who visits.
Well, don't tourists go to Vegas expecting to leave with a lot less money? Assuming they are realistic about their odds, that is.
Oh, absolutely. People expect to spend money but they hate extra taxes and fees.
See: Ticketmaster
True. But, like Ticketmaster fees, though people do really hate hotel taxes, they don't hate them enough to refuse to go there (or buy the tickets). So the strategy continues to work for the fee imposers.
Is there anywhere tourists go that they don't come away with less money?
Vegas would rather you not go there and lose money. Just send the check.
Hence online sportsbooks. Problem solved!
True vacations are expensive. But speaking as a (former) regular Vegas visitor, the city has really gone nuts on high charges for limited value especially relative to 10-15 years ago.
I suspect 4 out of 5 people at a gaming table in Vegas recognize the can lose money or that they’ve lost money in the past but don’t EXPECT to lose money.
More to the topic. I paid $190 for two A’s tickets yesterday. That’s a lot but I had great seats (4 rows behind the dugout) and got to see my team play. And was willing to splurge for one game. I’d never pay that for A’s season ticket or even a 10-game plan. I’ve probably been to Vegas 20 times over the past 10 years and never thought about seeing a baseball game except the one time we met my parents for the explicit purpose of seeing the Cubs in Spring Training. That said my friends and I are atypical tourists in Vegas.
Max was watched by an MLB OFFICIAL when he cleaned his hands off. He was also watched by an MLB OFFICIAL when he reapplied the rosin. Neither time did the MLB OFFICIAL say ‘wash them more’ or ‘that’s too much rosin’ or ‘the rosin is not where it should be’. Additionally, the ump who tossed Max is the only ump in MLB to have thrown out anyone for this (3 times). Seems this ump wants to have his name know, perhaps the new Angel Hernandez?
I'd love to see them get a bunch of readings with a friction tester to determine scientifically how sticky is TOO sticky.
As I said below, Phil Cuzzi sucks. https://www.usatoday.com/videos/sports/mlb/2012/10/14/1633511/
Phil Cuzzi sucks. https://www.usatoday.com/videos/sports/mlb/2012/10/14/1633511/
I feel for all of those A's fans, many of who have been dicked around by the Raiders and watched the Warriors cross the bridge to SF. I know a large handful of diehard A's fans. They talk like someone in an abusive relationship who is always hoping things will magically change. And of course Vegas will do great at the gate, like the Golden Knights, because of all of the out of town fans who travel to see their team and spend a couple of days gambling. Sigh. Capitalism.
Get rid of the competitive balance tax and contract length may come down. But then again may not. Avoiding the soft cap is nice. So too is cash flow and future discounts on present value. MLB owners are many things; economically illiterate not included.
Are you implying that the real reason some owners want shorter contracts is that they’re being shown up by their ‘peers’? Spending too much money and making me look like I’m a greedy mofo!
Shown up? Nah. They want to save money more than save face.
Well if it’s not shame, why should they care at all? Just carry on ripping off your fans, and ignore the other owners.
Because if they can hold their player expenses down and other teams can't outspend them, they are more competitive. More wins equals more fans, more beer and brat sales and higher tv revenue. Which means costs go down and revenue goes up. Nice daily double for owners.
Agreed. We had long term contracts before the CBT was such a factor. Deferring money is always a win and why players don't get $50M/season.
The real problem with these deals is we're going to see more and more situations like Pujols and Cabrera where they keep playing long beyond being useful because they have $30M reasons to show up. A shorter contract with higher AAV would "let" them walk away in their late 30s.
When I was an undergrad at The Ohio State University, Hocking Hills State Park was one of my favorite getaways. Loved walking out the flat forest path to discover you were on the edge of a cliff!
Is Lefty Grove better than Cy Young?
Yes. I mean, Cy Young never even won a Cy Young Award despite the fact his name is on the award. Feel like the voters then knew what was up.
Grove was also a legendary redass, while Young was pretty boring. Seems an easy choice.
Do you mean easy choice because Craig loves to rip redasses? Perhaps MadBum is one of his top 28 so he can write about him too.
Though I don't know that 8 to 12 year olds are the right audience to complain about redasses.
I just looked it up - Cy Young Started 815 games and had decisions in 827 ! 7356 IP
If IP is the standard, why not include Tungsten Arm O'Doyle?
I would have Grove over Young. Young started when the mound was 50 feet away and played his entire career with a ball made out of day old oatmeal wrapped in wet newspapers. Grove played his career at the height of the live ball explosion. Grove was dominant in a way that Young never was, leading in ERA and ERA+ 9x each, most of anyone, leading in FIP 8x, second behind Clemens and Walter Johnson's 9, and in bWAR 8x, again most of anyone.
Young was great, of course, but not as dominant as Grove and with reasonable (in my always humble opinion) time line adjustments, Grove was greater.
My flip comment notwithstanding, this is generally my thinking. Young played a fundamentally different game. The only player I have in the book who debuted before 1900 is Honus Wagner.
Poor Old Hoss Radbourn didn't make the cut.
David Gordon, in his book Baseball Generations, developed a "Career Value Index" to compare players across generations. By his calculations Cy Young comes in at #6 all time at 194 CVI. Babe Ruth tops the charts with 270 CVI. Wagner #11 sits at 172.4. Grove is 15th at 161.4.
So you omitted Julio Franco?
It's really an impossible exercise to pick the "top" 28 or top 50 or top 100. I'd make the same argument about Cy Young that you made about Clemente. They literally named the pitching award after him.
At the same time, how to value players who played ~100 years is really hard and for me WAR does a terrible job with this. I'd be fine with a list that only included Ruth from that era, essentially arguing modern players are far, far better than those of long ago. Also probably makes for a better book to talk about players that kids' dads or grandpas saw than legends from a different game.
The book needs a full page photo opposite each description right? How many decent photos even exist for pre-WWII era players? I'm guessing all the good ones already were featured by Ken Burns.
The "minor" leagues were not as well defined in his day, since there were no official affiliations. A pitcher could make a good living pitching well in the International League in the 1920, and Grove presumably did, since he stuck around long enough to win over 100 games there. He pitched in the majors in a much more competitive and offensively skewed time, as opposed to entirely in the Dead Ball era like Young. All of which is just to say that the argument *can* be made...
COMPLETELY OFF-TOPIC QUESTION: There is a commercial in heavy rotation on MLB Network for a business credit card featuring a woman who makes modernized kitchen gadgets and uses the cash back to grow her company ... at one point another woman at a white board turns around and says "like a smart coffee grinder" - and I KNOW she once had a part on a sitcom playing someone's snotty friend/rival/mother-in-law/boss, but I CANNOT place her and it's bothering me (plus I feel bad that she's doing commercial work and such a bit part besides). Can anyone help me?
And of course I can't find a link to share - will keep looking.
Sir, this is a Wendy’s
I can't help you but I know EXACTLY the commercial you mean.
It looks like the main woman in the commercial is the CEO of the actual company featured. She states on her LinkedIn page that the commercial was filmed at two of the company's locations using team members.
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/samanthatrose_chaseinkpartner-activity-7010672436937400320-tuR5
Thank you - the woman I'm talking about is at about 0:24 and I'm pretty sure she's an actress ... and maybe I'm crazy but I feel like I can see her in pearls saying something mean but funny to a perky female lead.
Okay, when I watched the commercial looking for this person, my instant reaction is that she looks like Wendie Malick. I don't think that it is, but it sure looks like her.
THAT'S IT! No idea if it's her but that's who I was remembering. Thank you thank you thank you.
Based on your pearls and mean but funny comment, I knew that had to be it. She really does look like her! I would think that Malick doesn't need a small speaking role in a commercial, but if the WGA strike talk lately has taught me anything, it's that people in Hollywood don't necessarily have as much money as you think, unless they are big enough that they have even MORE money than you'd think. (This is going to be my best achievement for the day.)
Can't speak to the commercial or Wendie Malick, but I learned recently that the only reason Mayim Bialik auditioned for The Big Bang Theory is she needed a role to renew her screen actors guild card and thus qualify for their health insurance.
And independent of that a lot actors don't make (or save) nearly as much as we think they do.
Well, it's definitely not her, because Wendie Malick is somehow 72 years old. She played Dr. Pimple Popper on an episode of Seinfeld almost 30 years ago, though I remember her from the HBO show Dream On.
I was going to suggest Linda Fiorentino, though she is also too old to be in a Chase commercial, or at least to be this person in this Chase commercial, since she's 63 now, and that woman in the commercial doesn't look like she's past 40.
Las Vegas Athletics: Something I’ve never understood about the old, old days, is why the perpetually impoverished franchises among the Original Eight in each league were perpetually impoverished: Athletics, Braves, Senators, Browns, to name the first that come to mind. These were not particularly small-market teams in the first half of the last century, yet just about the first thing you learn about any of these franchises is how precarious they always were financially.
You would think, in the abstract, that with the reserve clause, baseball’s greater popularity, and almost no competition from other professional sports (NFL was not a big deal in those days), any franchise would have been a license to print money, but, no. Probably none of these teams, in their original cities, ever really shook off the effects of the Depression followed by WWII, which maybe explains the Thirties and Forties, but the Roaring Twenties?
Revenue streams were basically ticket sales and that's it. Three of those four teams had competing baseball teams in the other league, so that made it tougher. Washington, well, they were usually just poorly run and, really, until the post-war era, D.C. was a relative backwater.
Yes, and the NL teams in the two-team towns were there first. It is interesting to speculate why, in the case of Boston, the newer AL team eventually won out. Perhaps winning the WS four times in seven seasons 1912-1918 gave the Red Sox an enduring glow, because, after WWI, both teams were pretty bad most of the time.
I think I have a SABR book about Boston baseball somewhere. Perhaps I should read it!
The newer AL team won New York as well, even if the departing NL teams were eventually replaced.
It’s interesting that the more established Phillies won Philadelphia, given the A’s won, I think, five or six World Series during their time in Philly, while the Phils were generally in the bottom half of the standings.