Where Bad Sports Journalism Came To Die

FJM has gone dark for the foreseeable future. Sorry folks. We may post once in a while, but it's pretty much over. You can still e-mail dak, Ken Tremendous, Junior, Matthew Murbles, or Coach.

Main / Archives / Merch / Glossary / Goodbye

Tuesday, October 31, 2006


So Yadier Molina Is Going To Win This Thing?

Don't forget to tune in tonight at 8 on ESPN as clutch actor Michael Chiklis unveils the Pepsi Clutchamacalit or whatever team. Yadier Molina is prominently featured in the promotional video clip on their website, so I assume he will be crowned Mr. Clutch 2006.

I'm personally much more excited about the Shasta Choker Awards and the RC Cola Players Who Performed Pretty Much Like They Always Do In Virtually All Situations, With Some Variations Due to Random Chance Awards, which will, as always, be given to each and every player in major league baseball.

Labels: ,

posted by Junior  # 4:46 PM
RC Cola are a bunch of hardline sabermetric dicks. Players aren't robots, RC Cola.
Post a Comment

<< Home

Are you ready for some football?

No? Sorta? Yeah, dark days. Anyway, someone needs to explain whether the Associated Press rounds down or doesn't care.

New England (6-1) more than doubled Minnesota's average of allowing 15.8 points per game, setting the tone for an easy victory with an opening drive on which Brady completed all six of his throws for 94 yards.

New England won 31-7.

So...what's going on over at the Arizona Fall League these days?


posted by Coach  # 3:02 PM
You knocked my somewhat emotional, Season-Ending Eckstein Round-Up down the page for .6 of a football point?

How do you sleep at night, Coach?
Sorry KT, the numbers all pointed conclusively to signs that David Eckstein was due for a little, old-fashioned overlookin'.
Post a Comment

<< Home

Corrections Department

On Wednesday, July 26, we reported that Harold Reynolds may have taken a female intern out to dinner at Outback Steakhouse. Reynolds now explains, in lawsuit form, that the dinner in fact took place at Boston Market.

We wish to deliver our sincerest apologies to Mr. Reynolds. To allege that he would dine at Outback was a false and malicious attack on his character. Mr. Reynolds clearly enjoys the finer things in life, and never again shall his affinity for delicious double marinated rotisserie chicken be overlooked by this site.


posted by Junior  # 2:41 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

Eckstein Round-Up

It's been several days since America's Favorite Little Scamp singlehandedly beat the Tigers for the World Series title, not only going 23-22 (he tripled twice in a single at-bat in Game Two) with sixteen doubles, but also throwing three consecutive no-hitters in Games 3-5, despite staying at the stadium late every night to help the concessions crew clean up the grandstands and tutoring his little brother in pre-calc.

In case any of you are wondering, we here at FJM do not hate David Eckstein. What we hate is bad sports journalism, and there has been a lot of it recently. Apparently, nothing brings out the cliche machines faster than a small man who plays sports.

David Eckstein started the World Series 0-11. Did anyone hear anything about how bad Eck was in the clutch? No. No one heard that. If Alex Rodriguez had an 0-11 slump in three playoff games, the hand-wringing and typewriter pounding would have been deafening. How do I know this? Because ARod did do that, and that did happen.

The point is, ARod is a large human, who makes a lot of money. Eck is a small human, who makes less money. Their career performances during the regular season and during the playoffs indicate beyond a shadow of a fraction of a smidgeon of a blorgtion of a flernson of a doubt that Alex Rodriguez is the better player by like eleven standard deviations. And yet: no one writes anything good about ARod these days, and everyone writes good things about Eckstein.

Does no one in the world remember the 2000 ALCS, when ARod was 9-22 with 2HR and put up this line: .409/.480/.773? Does anyone realize that in the last 2 series Eck played in before the NLCS he put up a scrappy little 6-35 with 6 singles? Does anyone care?

Well, we do. Because people love to attack big rich guys, and love to praise small little scrappy guys, no matter what the actual facts of their performances tell us. To wit, here's a quote from former Eckstein coach Joe Maddon, from yet another paean to a little man's big heart. Read the last sentence of the quote like seven times in a row, and try to figure out how this is possible.

"I've always said David was the smartest guy on the field every night, and that included both coaching staffs," Maddon said Friday. "And I've never seen the guy have a bad day. Even if he goes 0-for-4 and makes three errors, he helps you."

I don't trust that you all read that seven times in a row, so:

Even if he goes 0-for-4 and makes three errors, he helps you.
Even if he goes 0-for-4 and makes three errors, he helps you.
Even if he goes 0-for-4 and makes three errors, he helps you.
Even if he goes 0-for-4 and makes three errors, he helps you.
Even if he goes 0-for-4 and makes three errors, he helps you.
Even if he goes 0-for-4 and makes three errors, he helps you.
Even if he goes 0-for-4 and makes three errors, he helps you.

No. No he does not. He does not help you. He hurts you. Anyone who does this in a game hurts you, no matter whether he is 5'7" 165, or 6'4" 230.

I'm sure David Eckstein is an awesome dude. I actually do admire his ability to hang in a league where everyone is bigger than he is. I get the human interest angle. I get it. I really do. Nice work, Eck.

But David Eckstein is not great at baseball. He is almost like the definition of average at baseball. And people insist on saying otherwise, even when they admit that he is not that good at baseball.

The baseball season is over, now, and although we have a Hot Stove to look forward to, we here at FJM always lament the final days of October, because it's just not as much fun to post dumb things that Michael Irvin says about the Packers, or make jokes about Barry Melrose's mullet. So, we'll keep posting whenever we can, but as a final WS/Eckstein round-up, and to celebrate the end of a great year, here are my favorite responses to the Eckstein Height and Weight Contest. Thanks to all of you who wrote in -- more than 500 of you -- and thanks for being the snarkiest and most consistently amusing reader base a bunch of nerds could ever ask for.

Again, the questions:

1. How tall is David Eckstein?
2. How much does he weigh?


1. How tall is David Eckstein?
Nelson De La Rosa plus two inches.

2. How much does he weigh?
Trick question, David Eckstein does not weight anything. He is composed completely of toughness and grittiness and those have zero weight.

Bob K:

All I *know* for sure is that he plays like he's 7'8" and 425 lbs.


170 cm, 75kg!
i have nothing better to do!


Weight: As big as a 15 year old high school chess club president with the arm strength of the president's 9-year-old sister, but the minute you begin to doubt him, you're already out.

Height: Shorter than a pesky annoying toddler, but as soon as you look at Eckstein as an easy out he somehow makes contact with the ball and uses his peskiness to get the centerfielder to trip on wet grass, letting the ball land for a double.

Now, if you'll excuse me I need to get back to my math homework, whereby I calculate everything using only measurements of heart and soul combined with a little hustle. I have an F so far in the class, but that's because the teacher is a geek who thinks numbers are important.


1. 5.515158362e-17 parsecs
2. 7.484274105e-8 teragrams


He was only 3'8'' and weighed 49 lbs when he was drafted by the Red Sox, but through grit, hustle, heart, scrappiness, and white-man blue-collar work ethic, he outhustled and outgrinded his genetic code and grew to the height of 5'7'' and the weight of 165 lbs. Sadly, no amount of grit and hustle could undo his terrible skin condition.

D K:

Height: Why the fuck does it matter? The bastard's got GRIT IN HIS FUCKING DNA.
Weight: Who fucking cares? He's the toughest player I've ever seen in uniform. THAT'S ALL THAT MATTERS.


1. How tall is David Eckstein?

2. How much does he weigh?


1. 6'5"
2. 270

I may be confusing him with Frank Thomas. But how many World Series MVPs does the Big Hurt have? Exactly.


David Eckstein's height is: Clutch
His weight is: Hustle


How tall is Eckstein? As tall as his heart is invaluable to the success of all teams everywhere.
How much does he weigh? He’s too feisty to get onto a scale.


His hustle is 11 feet tall, and his heart weighs 2,461 lbs.

Also, this year his GORP (Grit over replacement player) was an astounding 193.8!


1. Doesn't matter
2. Doesn't matter

When you want to know the size of his heart, then we'll talk.


posted by Unknown  # 1:16 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

Them Gritty Types, They Always Fall For Each Other

Thanks to reader Craig for pointing out that Eckstein's wife, Ashley Drane, won a silver medal on the Nickelodeon game show GUTS in 1994.

That's right. GUTS.

Hosted by Michael Goddam O'Malley.


Silver. Medal.

Labels: ,

posted by dak  # 2:00 AM
And, from what I understand, she was in third until the Agrocrag.
Here's the thing about Ashley Drane:

6'2", 220, Runs a 4.4 40.
Drane is a classic underachiever-type. Opposites attract.
Post a Comment

<< Home

Monday, October 30, 2006


FJM Quiz

1. How tall is David Eckstein?
2. How much does he weigh?

The first 10,000 correct responses to these impossible-to-find-answers-to questions will receive a congratulatory e-mail from me, Ken Tremendous, winner of the 2006 David Eckstein Award for Excellence in Underappreciation. E-mail me with the link above. And good luck! Again, there's very little chance you'll be able to find the answers.


posted by Unknown  # 3:31 AM
Happy Birthday, Mr. Tremendous.
Post a Comment

<< Home

Sunday, October 29, 2006


Sorry Everybody

We accidentally missed the Eckstein article in one of the most venerable newspapers in human history. Us-a culpa.

Everyfuckingbody finally familiar with the smallness of David Eckstein, and the way he hustles down the line like almost every other major league baseball player? No?

Here are the Cliffs' Notes:

pocket shortstop
rosary beads
little player who does big things
neither was a flashy play
workmanlike things that help teams win
core player
"He's the toughest guy I've ever seen in a uniform" (proving to be the most irresistable quote of 2006 for sportswriters)
5 feet 7 inches
baby faced
looks like he wandered into the lineup from an American Legion tournament
broke his bat
two-out roller
"our club responds to how hard he plays"
walk-on at the University of Florida
puttering along
Granderson slipped

Labels: ,

posted by dak  # 9:47 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

Saturday, October 28, 2006


Football (Sorry)

Color man Todd Blackledge during ESPN's South Carolina / Tennessee match-up [word for word] :

"I don't know if the numbers really are that, but it feels like we've had a lot of penalties in this game. I mean, I don't know if we've actually had a lot. . ."

Ah, yes. The old Penalty Chill Factor. "There were only six penalties in the game, but if you were announcing, it would have felt more like fourteen."

Labels: ,

posted by dak  # 10:59 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home


I've written a short play based on a ridiculous thing I heard on the radio.

I hope you enjoy it.

Labels: , , , ,

posted by dak  # 9:37 PM
Ridiculous thing: A
Play: A-minus
KT's comment: C+
This "riff": F-plus
Post a Comment

<< Home

You Didn't Want It -- You Got It!!

Here's a guy from San Diego who's really shaking thing's up a little. How? By writing a story about David Eckstein.

built like the batboy
little league lightweight
throws a baseball as if he were heaving a javelin
certified shrimp
sawed-off leadoff man
pestering presence
nothing fancy
maximum effort
enviable efficiency
gritty little gamer
more ambition than aptitude
University of Florida walk-on
"man of iron"
no one would ever mistake Eckstein for a superstar
small ball
continues to crowd the plate despite accumulated bruises
seafood motif

Labels: ,

posted by dak  # 6:58 PM
Thanks to FJM reader Randy.
Post a Comment

<< Home

Protect Ya Eck

I would have thought this point I'm about to make to be self-evident, but judging from the e-mails we're getting, it may not be. Here goes:

We have nothing against David Eckstein. I don't know if he's a good dude or not; people generally seem to think he's a ruling dude. And hey, I hope he is. I hope he and his wife are very happy and have like 30 dogs and children someday.

This is not about David Eckstien. This is about sportswriters across the country who have all chosen to write the exact same story. This is about bad journalism, and laziness, in the news sources that you pay for. The opportunity cost, if you will, of other great stories from the World Series that we're not reading about, is becoming staggering.

This may not be enjoyable for anyone other than ourselves. I guess, sorry?

And now, onto more Eckshit. This time from Ben Walker of the AP. Eck Time!

biggest little man
5-foot-7 and all banged up
true spirit (spirit = "Yankee")
"club responds to how hard he plays"
little things
fairy tale
and 5-7 is being generous
extra inches
odds have been against Eckstein ever since he was in youth ball
"toughest guy I've ever seen in a uniform"

Labels: ,

posted by dak  # 6:41 PM
Thanks to the curiously named F FF for this link. (Whither Alessio??)
Post a Comment

<< Home

An Examination of the Three Key Senate Races that Could Decide Control of Congress

Just kidding. It's another Eckstein article.

But with an Asian twist: this is from the Taiwanese Taipei Times.

Yes. Our little friend with the big gritty sub-10 VORP has penetrated the hearts of our brothers and sisters half a world away.

Read the article, or read my fun word snipets below. Either way, ni hao, Taipei Times! Huān yíng guāng lín!

Let me tell you about David Eckstein
"He had done everything that a lead-off man should do."
"He had gotten on base."
"He stole second base."
"He slid into third on a passed ball by the Braves catcher."
"He hit a double."
All 170cm of him (That metric twist is my favorite part.)
"What he lacks in height, he makes up for with pure ?"
"I'm not even sure of the word for it. Heart?"
Incredible will?
Sprint for first base
Diving [for a ground ball]
Shortstop who never quits
Very large shoes
Completely underestimated


posted by Unknown  # 6:28 PM
A very large tip of the cap to Tony for the link.
Post a Comment

<< Home

I'm Going to Keep Doing This Until Someone Tells Me to Stop

Send your "Stop Doing This" requests to:

Stop Doing This
c/o Ken Tremendous
FJM Headquarters/Secret Air Force Nerve Gas Project
Area 54
Utah, USA

It will take weeks for them to get to our underground government bunker. And in that time, I will link to, and snip words from, thousands of identical articles about David Eckstein, like this one.

Either click the link and read Tom Verducci's version of the same exact thoughts and feelings that every other sportswriter in the free world has expressed in the last few days, or just read my list of words that are taken from said article, below. That will save some time, and I swear you can get the whole meaning of the article from just reading the word list.

165 pounds
Cub Scout
"barely qualifies for a razor"
"one of the most clutch players I've ever seen"
"Tigers centerfielder Curtis Granderson turned a routine out -- by that pest Eckstein, of course -- into a rally-starting double when he flat out fell in centerfield"
(Isn't it amazing how Eckstein continues to receive credit for that, even when the writer of the article always notes how Granderson just flat-out fell down? How is this because of Eckstein being a "pest?")
Size [does not matter]
Magnitude [of a person's heart]
Little dude
Little man
Role model
Good little player
Good player
Not...big enough to make it
Very big man

Labels: ,

posted by Unknown  # 2:13 PM
Thanks to Matthew for the tip. And continuing thanks to everyone else who keeps sending me links to these things.
Post a Comment

<< Home

Who Among Us is Interested in Something Other Than David Eckstein?

Not me.

Here are some words from this article:

"The definition of a clutch player"
[He] even contributed to the Tigers' bad luck. (Note: ???)
"You can't watch Eckstein play and not smile."
"...embodies the word undaunted."
"...he still looks as if he would be better placed at the American Legion World Series than here.
Youthful looks
"He may look like a puppy but he plays like a big dog."
"all heart"
"His throwing motion is a little odd"
Rally starter
"the pest"
"Eckstein fought off good pitches and hit a foul-ball "home run" before finally getting on base with a swinging bunt."
"... fly ball that went for a double when Granderson fell in the seventh."
"at his best when it matters the most."


posted by Unknown  # 2:31 AM
Thanks to Scott for the tip.
Post a Comment

<< Home

Friday, October 27, 2006


Billy Ray Cyrus is Singing

I'll be watching at least part of Game 5, so I'm going to try something new and post any comments I have under this post.

Labels: ,

posted by Junior  # 8:25 PM
After Billy Ray starts, the first thing we see? America's Paperboy, David Eckstein, bowing his head and solemnly singing along. Someone call Norman Rockwell.
Also: David Eckstein, male pattern baldness?
Tim McCarver appears on my screen. Minutes before he starts talking about Eckstein: 0.2
Billy Ray Cyrus' Wikipedia page, on the rivalry between Cyrus and Travis Tritt:

Cyrus and Tritt's rivalry was noted by Tupac Shakur, who saw that the feud elevated the fame of both persons, even the perceived one-hit wonder Cyrus. Shakur was inspired by this to turn on his friend Biggie Smalls---for commercial, not personal success.[citation needed]

Citation needed indeed.
Jesus. Curtis Granderson is 1 for the series. Zero walks. Six K's.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Time for a real leadoff hitter to hit!

Here is some more info about my man D.E.:

"He married actress Ashley Drane -- she's been on "That '70s Show" and "That's So Raven" -- last November and their wedding reception featured an Alice in Wonderland theme."
We'll get 'em next time, Davey. Here's some milk and cookies, you adorable little scamp.
Jeff Weaver
2006 Regular Season ERA: 5.76
2006 Playoff ERA: 2.91

Justin Verlander
2006 Regular Season ERA: 3.63
2006 Playoff ERA: 7.47

Verlander looks extremely shaky. And he hasn't looked good all postseason-long. I'm not going to write it off as nerves necessarily, though, as McCarver is doing over and over again.

I mean, in August, he was terrible also, with a 6.83 ERA. Was that also anxiety?
Fatigue could be a factor in Verlander's decline (a 3.01 ERA pre-All Star Break; 4.54 post-ASB). Before this year, he threw 113, 116.1, and 105.2 innings in college and then 130 between the minors and majors last year.

This year, he's thrown 186 innings in the regular season and 15.2 in the playoffs.

But of course, McCarver would have us believe it's youth and inexperience alone.
Jeff Weaver Perfect Game Watch

We're through two innings. I'm not changing positions.
Joe Buck mentioned that not much was made of the Tigers' acqusition of Sean Casey, "a lifetime .300 hitter."

Did you know:

Sean Casey OBP-ed .286 for the Tigers this year? He did this for 53 games.

He's had a decent career, though. It's possible he'll bounce back next year.
The Cardinals should go ahead and just bat the absolutely awful Yadier Molina second in the lineup. He's clearly turned the corner.

Just so you know I'm kidding: Molina's OPS in the playoffs so far is .931.

Here are his OPS splits by month for the regular season: .350, .585, .753, .626, .694, .605.

.753 is the bright spot of his season.
Full disclosure: yesterday afternoon I injected David Eckstein with four liters of human growth hormone, androstenedione, and a splash of SARS just for kicks.
I can taste D-Town's World Series MVP from here.

Let's play FJM You Fill in the Blank!

Eck's MVP trophy tastes like ______.
The answer to tonight's FJM You Fill in the Blank is ...


David Eckstein's MVP trophy tastes like grits.

I've donated $1000 to breast cancer in the winner's name.
Jeff Weaver Perfect Game Watch
2 1/3 innings.
Jeff Weaver Perfect Game Watch
Sorry, jinxed ya, Jeff! I'm sure you'll get it next time out.
I have donated $1000 to breast cancer research, just so that we at FJM weren't donating money solely to breast cancer itself.
A Tale of Two Postseason Players

Player A loves the bright lights of the playoffs. He thrives in the spotlight. He lives for the big moment. He is clutch personified. Player A starts raking as soon as his team makes the postseason. In two playoff series (eight games total), he goes .471/.514/.529 with 5 R and 4 RBI. He's so big-time and fearless he wins the Championship Series MVP award.

Player B shrinks under the bright lights. He gets nervous in the batter's box. He looks tentative. Maybe he needs more playoff experience. In the World Series, Player B embarrasses himself by going 0-15 when his team needs him most. Player B may be the biggest choker mankind has ever known.

In the next comment ... the M. Night Shyamalan twist ending to this riveting tale!
Player A and Player B are both 2006 Placido Polanco.

And I'm a goddamn ghost!!!
Hey Placido, "swing away." Am I right?
Hey Placido, you're living in the fucking present day.

You are an idiot.
I just stole $1000 from breast cancer and put it towards engraving David Eckstein's MVP Trophy with the words: "Take That, Regular-Sized Persons."
You guys seen that Placido Polanco American Express ad?

His best work in years.

Chk chk-a!
Can we all agree after this season Major League Baseball will go ahead and rename the World Series MVP the Eckstein Award?

Guy deserves it -- he's so little!
What we have done with the number of Eckstein references in the last four days on this site amounts to a "Google Bomb."
I just cast $1000 in the next MNShamy movie, as an alien who fucks David Eckstein in the mouth.

I'm not kidding, btw. Go Google "Eckstein grit."
This is my Safari homepage now. I encourage you all to follow suit.
The Mayor!

Here's my Berman name for him: Sean "John Wayne" Casey.
What about just Sean "Wayne" Casey?

Everybody visit this link. Just do it. I'm waiting. Did you do it? Great. I like you.

P.S. Did anyone see all the times I screwed up this comment?
Re: Sean "Wayne" Casey

I hate elegance and simplicity.
Verlander is clearly pitching to Eckstein to lock up the MVP for him. This is the most obvious conspiracy since 9/11.
Eckstein didn't homer there because he didn't want to kill the rally. This guy knows baseball.
I'll be the one to say it. 80% of that $120,000 check to the Boys and Girls Club will go to America's Best Boy, David Eckstein.
When you make a list of bands whose music you want to stick in for bumps in and out of the World Series, how far down is My Chemical Romance on that list?

For the people at Fox, the answer is third. They are third on the list.
Did I just see a foam Budweiser-crown-thing hat? On a woman, at Busch Stadium?

For some reason it just sort of hit me that today could be the last day of the baseball season.

"The smell of hospitals in winter..."
Chris Duncan is an absolute butcher out there. Is this the sloppiest World Series of all time? Discuss (I'm talking to the imaginary people in my brain).
If the Cardinals win tonight, they will be the first team to win the World Series with as few as 83 wins since ...
It's a trick question. It's the Dodgers, with 63 wins in 1979. But they only played 110 games, so their winning percentage was way way better.

The truth is, if I'm reading these numbers right, no one has ever won the World Series while playing as poorly as these Cardinals did in the regular season.
When do we start reading Cardinals: Team of Destiny articles?

And what do guys do with all the Tigers: Team of Destiny pieces they preemptively wrote?

This is just one of those situations where a size 13 1/2 beats a 9 1/2.

That, ladies and gentlemen ...


I keep hearing Joe Buck talking about "PFP: Pitcher Fielding Position." As if it's a very common term in the parlance of baseball.

A google search for "Pitcher Fielding Position" yielded 3 results.

Am I crazy or his he making shit up?
Oh, good.

Center Varcity dude is not even gonna take his hands out of his pockets.
Re: dude in center.

On second look, is David Eckstein in Varcity?
A Google search for "varcity" yields 30,997 more results than a search for "Pitcher Fielding Position."
Varcity doesn't have a Wikipedia page or a MySpace page.

Internet, I'm very, very disappointed in you.
Thanks, Joe Buck, for telling me David Eckstein's height and weight. I hadn't heard the news.
I'm sorry -- Eckstein is now climbing into contention for MVP because he reached on a double clutch by the shortstop?

Yes, he hustles down the line.

(Previous post based on a comment by Joe Buck, fwiw.)
Joe starts the Eckstein for MVP talk. Get in line, buddy. Way to get on the bandwagon. I was there years ago, before Eckstein's dad even thought about Eckstein's mom's boobs.
It's like Manny Ramirez and a bunch of guys who are too hurt to make it worth it. And fatties.
Reader Aaron suggests that PFP stands for Pitcher's Fielding Practice. Which, of course, it does, at least far more than it does for Pitcher Fielding Position.
Oh, that PFP? The one that yields 792 results (when quoted) on Google?

I say let Eckstein pitch the rest of the game. For both sides.
Does anyone else think Eckstein's got a fighting chance of winning AI this year?
Hats off to the four people who have checked out the Blogger Profile for Junior's alter ego "Breast Cancer."

That must have been really satisfying for all of you (as it was for me).
Goddamn, Jeff Weaver is still pitching?
Dude, Breast Cancer Times is going to start kicking ass in the offseason.
Jeff Weaver has just been injected with just enough Eckstein DNA to help him push through the 8th.
Theory: "Jeff Weaver" is David Eckstein inside Jeff Weaver's corpse. Eckstein murdered Weaver before the game and is wearing his hollowed-out body as a costume in the top half of innings, then quickly changing in a phone booth he had them install on the field.
The phone booth is three feet high.
Jeff Weaver: 8.0 IP, 1 ER, 4 H, 9 K, 1 BB

David Eckstein and Yadier Molina: 5-9, 3 R, 2 RBI

Carlos Guillen, Magglio Ordonez, Ivan Rodriguez: 0-10
A little more about Inevitable 2006 World Series MVP David Eckstein.

In 32 postseason games before this year, this clutch sparkplug slugged .297 and got on base at a .324 clip. In 128 gritty postseason at bats, he had exactly one extra-base hit.

In fact, he had two more HBP than he had XBH.
I sort of hope Polanco is more Player A than Player B right here.

Maybe he can use his "Sixth Sense" or steal some "Signs"!

He appears to have some weird growths on his face.



[ going with "In-Card-ible" by the way]
La Russa just said, "They refused to not let this happen."

Put that catchy slogan on a T-shirt!

2006 Cardinals: They Didn't Not Refuse to Not Let Winning Not Not Happen!
David Eckstein's voice is disappointingly low. Why not a high-pitched squeal?

My god -- maybe he's not that small after all.
Can Chevy now make an ad called "This Is Our Eckstein"?
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE put Eckstein footage into the This Is Our Country commercial. Just edit him into the Katrina floodwaters.
[yahoo! sports goes with the very elegant: "Cardinals reign on Tigers' parade (of errors)"]
Drudge choosing not to report the winner. Purell hand sanitizer still the lead story.
Re: the man on the screen right now.

Jeff Weaver or Jeff Daniels?
The answer ... Jeff Bridges?!?
Kevin Kennedy just suggested that maybe the Cards weren't given enough credit, in part because they had to play without David Eckstein for a while.

Their record without Eckstein (Aug 19 - Sep 17): 16-14.

That's good enough for a .533 winning percentage, better than their regular season average.
And there we have it: the 2006 baseball season comes to a close. Sloppy play, David Eckstein, and Mary J. Blige singing "One."

Just the way I imagined it.
Post a Comment

<< Home

Hey Everyone! Another Eckstein Article!

I will quote this one in full.

Small Eck Comes Up Big Vs. Tigers
Diminutive Star Big at Heart

by Ken Tremendous

Picture it: Joel Zumaya, the Detroit Tigers’ flamethrowing righty, stands on the mound. He is capable of throwing a baseball 120 miles per hour with wicked movement.

Sixty feet away, gritty and determined David Eckstein, all 5-foot, 7-inches and 165 pounds of him, stands at the plate. Or, rather, he buzzes around the plate, like a gnat around a pitcher’s head.

“He’s the grittiest player I have ever seen,” says Everyone. “You think he’s too small, you think his arm is too weak, you think he is not that good at baseball, you think he is a small, small boy who is very small, you think he can’t hurt you. And you are right. But god damn, is that small boy gritty and determined.”

And gritty. In college – the same age at which Angels’ first baseman Darin Erstad was busy being a hard-nosed punter -- David Eckstein was told that he was just too small. So instead of riding the roller coaster at the amusement park where someone told him that, he tried out for the baseball team. The 5-foot 5-inch 128 pound Eckstein quickly demonstrated that he belonged.

Also, he is tough. The 5-foot 1-inch, 102 pound Eckstein – this year alone – has broken three fingers, shattered an elbow, slammed his other fingers in a door, dislocated his shoulder, had his eyes gouged when one of the older boys took his lunchbox, stuck a knife into his side on a dare, broke his own neck intentionally, ate his own ankle, and allowed teammate Jeff Suppan to open the top of his head with a corkscrew. That’s a lot of abuse for one 4-foot 2-inch frame to take.

But did he miss even one game in 2006? Yes. He missed 39, actually. But holy fuck, is he tough.

And did these injuries affect his performance? I don’t think so, friend.

He hit like .350 and always came up clutch every single time and tore it up all through the playoffs and basically out-hustled everyone to the tune of 50 doubles and like a thousand runs. I haven’t checked to make sure that stuff is true, but I don’t need to. Because even if Eck didn’t do any of that, he at least was always gritty, which is what counts more than anything in baseball. Also there are home runs.

“The thing that makes David Eckstein so great,” says a person with a computer, “is nothing. His offense is worth 9 more runs over the course of the entire season than the average AAA call-up. So. That’s…something, I guess.”

Something indeed. Something gritty, determined, and detertty – a word I just made up that means determined/gritty.

So when David Eckstein -- 2-foot-1 in bare feet, topping the scales at barely 40 pounds soaking wet, and appearing in the game only thanks to an MLB Outreach Program to give malnourished young mole people a chance to fulfill a dream of playing in the big leagues – stands in against 8-foot-11 Joel Zumaya, who can throw a weighted leather exercise ball 200 MPH with his penis, you might think Zumaya has the advantage.

But he didn’t count on the heart, or the determinittyness, or the sheer heartitude, or the gnatosity, or the dirtheart, or the toughgrit, or the dirtdirtdirt, of an 11-inch tall, 2-pound foetus named Dirtid Gritstein.

Eckstein hit a soft liner to left that Craig Monroe kind of misplayed on a wet track, and it fell in for a double.

So, yeah, he’s kind of the best ever.

Ken Tremendous is about six feet tall, relatively big at heart, and mildly gritty.


posted by Unknown  # 8:24 PM
Was this on Yahoo? Yeah. I think I saw this on Yahoo.
Post a Comment

<< Home

And Now, For Some Substance (Still Eckstein-Related!)

Let's take a quick look back at that last Eckstein article, the one from the Philadelphia Daily News. The author, a guy named Sam Donnellon, actually attributes some tangible baseball quality to Eck -- he equates "grittiness" to the ability to extend at bats and force the pitcher to throw more pitches:

Here's what else is: Eckstein's approach. He entered last night's game more bubbly about a .154 World Series average than any major leaguer has a right to be. Why? Because Eckstein knew he was playing his role, watching and wasting pitches at the top of the order.

Right. He wasn't getting hits, but at least he was super-good at tiring pitchers out. Wasn't he? He had to be, he's gritty and tough. But wait: we don't have to just believe this is true on faith -- we can check and make sure because people actually count the number of pitches each player takes, write down that information, and input it into computers for posterity. From a very cursory glance at this page about Cardinals hitters, we can see that in the playoffs, of players who have hit in nine or more games, David Eckstein ranks sixth in pitches per plate appearance on his own team. Still convinced he was doing a good job "playing his role"?

His gritty and lengthy at-bats all postseason, even when they ended as outs and not doubles, have stamped a personality on a Cardinals team that survived its way into the postseason.

Yes, apparently you are. Well, let's look at the regular season, since the postseason is a stupidly small sample anyway. Here's a list of the top 40 MLB hitters in P/PA. Eckstein's sitting pretty, isn't he? No, he's not there. Hmm, that's odd. Well, here's numbers 40-80. Eckstein? Eck? Are you there?


I see.

You aren't, because Davidgrit Gritstein ranked 82nd in pitches per plate appearance during the 2006 season. Behind Tony Graffanino, Willy Taveras, Reed Johnson, Todd Walker and Jack Wilson. G. David Eckstein (the G. stands for Grit) ranked 71 places behind much-maligned strikeoutaholic Adam Dunn.

So you can say he's small. You can say he's a good person because he's playing through injuries. You can say he's inspirational and he helps the team win through increased morale like some sort of transluscent mascot. Just don't say his at bats are lengthy. Because they're almost exactly as lengthy as Nick Punto's or Adrian Beltre's.

Look. Even I'm sort of almost getting sick of writing about Eckstein. But he just hasn't been that good, either in the regular season or the playoffs. It's weird and frightening and fascinating to me that after he has one good game, the floodgates open up and everyone publishes the Eckstein piece it seems like they already had completely written and saved as a Word doc on their computers. This was his line in the playoffs before Game 4:

.185/.290/.259, 1 XBH

I mean, yikes. I'm not honestly suggesting that people should have been printing Eckstein is a Playoff Choker articles, but hey -- where were the Eckstein is a Playoff Choker articles?

Maybe I should stop being so angry and just start living by the credo everyone else seems to be following: if you're little and you're nice, people will like you and that's that.


posted by Junior  # 7:45 PM
Thanks to Mike and Pandrew for the links.
What kind of a name is "Mike?"
Post a Comment

<< Home

This is Getting RidEckulous, Parts III and IV

Seriously. These are two more articles. Different ones, by different writers -- yet the same. Here's the first.

easy to underestimate and even easier to overlook
heart and soul
fundamentally sound
110 (percent)
give it all you've got
5-foot-7, 165 pounds (with lead-soled platform shoes on)
fingers mashed during a bunt attempt
shoulder strained in a dive
"Toughest guy I've ever seen in uniform," (same La Russa quote)
"He's the definition of a clutch player." (ditto)
like a gnat – annoyingly persistent and impossible to deter
buzzing around your head
the honest-faced Eckstein
looks more like your paperboy
catalyst of the then-Anaheim Angels' 2002 championship team
the grit and soul of this team

Not done yet. Here's another paean.

small in stature, but comes up big again
David Eckstein puts everything he has into it
every muscle, every fiber, every boney little bone
The man is 5-7 and 165 pounds
Eckstein knew he was playing his role
"He's the definition of a clutch player," (La Russa quote again)
No ego
everything he had into it - every muscle, every fiber, every boney little bone (the guy actually wrote this out again in case we forgot his awesome first paragraph)


posted by Junior  # 7:36 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home


Just in case anyone is wondering whether we are being too harsh on people who praise poor little gritty determined banged-up heart-of-a-champion little-things-doer David ScrapHeart Eckstein, O.B.E., here is some decidedly ungritty data for them to gnaw on:


EQA: .251 (21st among all SS)
WARP1: 2.5
VORP: 9.2

9.2 VORP. 9.2.

That is 217th in MLB.

He was tied with Tony Graffanino and his own teammate John Rodriguez, who is predominantly a pinch hitter.

Kaz Matsui is only 5'10", and he's terrible, and his VORP was over 12.

Note, too, that in both of the articles linked in the posts sub, the work "overlooked" is used many times. In what possible freaking way is this guy overlooked? He is the most-looked player ever, in terms of how much his talent deserves to be "looked".


posted by Unknown  # 5:55 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

This is Getting RidEckulous, Part II

Read this.

Now, read this:

Here are some words and phrases that appear in that article:

Gritting [his teeth]
"When Eckstein went 0-for-11 to begin the World Series, you had to wonder."
Biggest hearts
5-foot, 7-inch
Big and imposing vs. small and scrappy
"He's not the fastest guy in the world"
"He doesn't have much power"
"You can list all the things he can't do."
"You realize he always gets it done no matter what."
"Eckstein made a statement in his first plate appearance against Jeremy Bonderman, digging out of an 0-2 hole and capping a nine-pitch at-bat with an infield single."
"Between the both of them, I don't think they get to six feet tall"
Little guys
Little swing
"put our bats [on it]"
Sacrifice his body
Scuffed up
"He's the kind of guy you want when the game is on the line."
"He doesn't get enough praise in this league."
" Tony La Russa...has called Eckstein 'the toughest guy I've ever seen in uniform' more than once in recent weeks."


posted by Unknown  # 5:35 PM
Thanks to Sam for the tip.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This is Getting RidEckulous

Read this.

Now, read this:

Here are some words and phrases that appear in that article:

165 pounds
Toughest [I've ever seen in uniform]
Banged up
Knocked around
Beaten down
"...he did fall into a 1-for-20 slump running from Game 5 in the NLCS through Game 3 of the World Series -- but he has come roaring back."
Suicide squeeze artist
"isn't known for his muscle"
Darin Erstad
Grinds out every at-bat
"ain't the biggest guy"
"or the strongest"
Makes things happen
"He fights you tooth and nail"
"People talk about him not having enough arm"
"People talk about him not having enough range"
"People talk about him not having enough size"
"That's what's most impressive."


posted by Unknown  # 5:26 PM
Thanks to our buddy Brian for the tip.
Post a Comment

<< Home

Of All The Things I've Heard About David Eckstein

Last night, ESPN Radio. I wish I knew who it was -- someone doing post-game commentary with Dave Campbell.

"If you scrapped the rosters for these two teams [Cards and Tigers], and started over by holding a draft between two managers, there are a bunch of guys who would be drafted ahead of David Eckstein. But if you ask the same managers: 'which player do you think is most likely to be on the winning team?', then David Eckstein will be the first name on that list."

That makes sense to everybody, right?


Labels: ,

posted by dak  # 2:38 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

Thursday, October 26, 2006


If Only There Were a Way to Tell Who Had the Best Offensive Year Using Statistics. But There Clearly Is Not.

So, let's just go ahead and give the Henry Aaron Award for the American League to Derek Jeter. Cool?

No? It isn't cool? Why not?

Exhibits 1-5 of what is like probably 1000 exhibits:

Runs Created, AL, 2006:

1. Ortiz 141.8
2. Sizemore 134.1
3. Jeter 128.2
4. Hafner 124.4
5. Thome 122.8

Not bad. So far, Jeter's a decent choice.

EqA, AL, 2006

1. Hafner .355
2. Ramirez (Bos.) .342
3. Ortiz .334
4. Thome .328
5. Giambi .326
6. Mauer .321
7. Dye .320
8. Jeter .316

Okay…not the best choice anymore. Hafner seems like the best choice so far, maybe. Or Ortiz. But let’s keep going. Because I love Derek Jeter, and I really want to believe that he was the best offensive player in the league this year.

IsoP, AL, 2006

1. Hafner .350
2. Ortiz .349
3. Thome .310
4. Dye .306
5. Giambi .305
Then there's a really long run of dudes who stink, like Kevin Millar and stuff, and then...
50. Pierzynski .141
51. Iguchi .141
52. Jeter .140

Huh. Now I'm definitely iffy on Derek Jeter being the best offensive player in the AL this year. Let's keep going.

SecA, AL, 2006

(This takes into account Jeter's SB, remember)

1. Hafner .570
2. Ortiz .565
3. Giambi .556
4. Thome, .529
5. Ramirez (Bos.) .519
(Then there's a long list of dudes, including Johnny Damon and Jorge Posada and Alex Rodriguez and, yes, Kevin Millar again, and then we get...)
28. Millar .302
29. Jeter .297

Ugh. This is looking more and more like Derek Jeter didn't deserve this award. Sorry I put in the thing about how Millar was in the long list of dudes who came before Jeter and then also wrote in Millar's place on the list right above Jeter, but I really wanted to hammer home the insane fact that Kevin Millar had a higher SecA than Derek Jeter in 2006.

Well, at least Jeter led the league in OPS. Check that -- he was 15th. Hafner was first.

No matter. I'm sure he was at the very least the best offensive player on his own team. Oops -- hang on. Giambi was way better in every single stat except BA and SB. And ARod was 13th in OPS. (Surprising -- I thought that guy sucked, based on what people who are professional sportswriters have told me.)

Well, okay, fine, whatever -- Jeter was definitely the very very best offensive SS in the AL. Except arguably Carlos Guillen, who had a higher OPS, more HR, more 2B, and more walks, in 80 fewer AB.

But look, everyone -- Jeter was second in VORP in the AL. So he's not a bad choice.

Of course, Hafner was first in VORP in the AL.

Travis Hafner is a better hitter than Derek Jeter. So are lots of other people. Jeter might deserve the MVP, because he put up his very very good stats from the SS position, which makes those stats very very valuable. But the Hank Aaron Award is not the MVP.

So there you have it, folks. Derek Jeter. Winner of the Hank Aaron Award for being the first-or-second-best-hitting SS in the AL, and probably like the third- or fourth-best hitter on his own team.

That's what we give the award out for, correct?

Labels: ,

posted by Unknown  # 12:14 AM
There have been some very angry blog-o-types -- my favorite kind, as I myself am an angry blog-o-type -- who have chastised me for using SecA and IsoP in the same breath as VORP, EqA, etc. Just to clarify: I am not equating these stats. The umbrella stats -- VORP, EqA, etc. -- tell the big picture story, and the smaller, more specific stats -- SecA, OPS, IsoP -- tell the details of the story. And the story is: Travis Hafner -- and probably Ortiz, Thome, and a few other dudes -- all had better offensive years than Derek Jeter.
And yes, okay, fine. This:

Winner of the Hank Aaron Award for being the first-or-second-best-hitting SS in the AL, and probably like the third- or fourth-best hitter on his own team.

is an exaggeration. Just having a little fun.

But Giambi had a better year. And ARod (.311 EqA to Jeter's .316) was basically equal.

And Kevin Millar had a higher SecA.
Post a Comment

<< Home

Wednesday, October 25, 2006


Joe Morgan, Haruspex

Just yesterday, we got this from Joe:

Michael (New York) : What Tigers hitters do you see breaking out during the next few games in St. Louis?

SportsNation Joe Morgan: I'm surprised that Pudge Rodriguez is 0 for his last 16 or 17 or whwatever, because he's such a good hitter. Part of the reason he's struggling is because he's a catcher and he's worn down. With the week off, I thought he'd be rejuvenated. So he's the guy I'd pick to break out and they need him!

As of right this second, Pudge is now 0 for his last 23, the longest hitless streak of his career. His last hit came in the seventh inning of Game 1 of the ALCS ... fifteen days ago.

This is his line for the playoffs:

5-40, .125/.182/.225, OPS of .407, 3 BB, 9 K

If Alex Rodriguez does that in next year's playoffs, he will be drawn and quartered and then they will tar and feather his quarters.


posted by Junior  # 3:43 PM
We sure made Joe look bad with this post, didn't we, team? Nice work, guys!
Post a Comment

<< Home

The Morning After

Still reeling from that "Scouting Report" that FOX gave us on Brad Garrett's character in the new sitcom "Til Death."

I need some Advil.

Labels: ,

posted by dak  # 3:23 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

Let's Look Again at the Holiday Inn Look Again Award

Remember two days ago, when we made fun of this horribly conceived award?

Once again, this is what Holiday Inn claims to be recognizing:

Behind every great team on the diamond, lurking in the shadow of baseball superstars, live the role players who sacrifice for their team in often unrecognized effort. Which of these role players' best deserves recognition for their contributions as the Holiday Inn Look Again Player of the Year?

Well, the guy who's running away with this thing has his own fucking cereal. How's that for a lifetime of unrecognized lurking in the shadows? It's about damn time we give this two-time All-Star and final Babe Ruth Award winner a little well-deserved recognition.

Since we last checked in, little Eck has extended his share from 30% to 31%. It's just like in real life -- the ball's already over the fence, but Eck's still sprinting home.

P.S. If you'd like to buy some Ecks O's, go here. They're eleven dollars and they increase your susceptibility to skin cancer by 300%. Pregnant or nursing mothers should avoid Ecks O's as they are known to cause birth defects such as dwarfism and Too Much Hustle disorder (TMH).

Thanks to reader Patrick for the tips.


posted by Junior  # 3:01 PM
And hey, about that 2002 Babe Ruth Award (ostensibly given to the best player in the World Series), reader Jonathan chimes in:

I think you might already be aware of this, but if you look at the 2002 World Series you'll find:

Troy Glaus: .385/.467/.846, 3 HR, 3 2B
Tim Salmon: .346/.452/.615, 2 HR
Bengie Molina: .286/.375/.381
Darin Erstad: .300/.312/.500
David Eckstein: .310/.364/.310 (that's right, zero XBH)

And, for good measure:

Barry Bonds: .471/.700/1.294, 4 HR, 2 2B, 13 BB (it may be cheesy, but those are beyond even video-game numbers)
J.T. Snow: .407/.448/.556, 1 HR
Jeff Kent: .276/.290/.621, 3 HR

Not only was David Eckstein wholly undeserving of an award that should have gone to Bonds (or at least Glaus), he was one of the very worst players on either team during the entire series.

Maybe that's why the award was immediately discontinued after Eckstein won it.
Youi know what's weird about that? Glaus, Salmon, Erstad, Snow, and Kent are all white. Which means that Eck's Scrappy Power is so high, he even beats out other white dudes for Scrappiness Awards.
Wouldn't "Eck-O's" be a better name than the linguistically awkward "Ecks-O's?"

Although, I guess you'd just be asking for a trademark infringement lawsuit from Marc Ecko.
Post a Comment

<< Home

Tuesday, October 24, 2006


Joeicus chatticus

In this episode of JoeChat, Joe reveals his innermost feelings on cheating and a shocking twist is unveiled: sometimes, Joe can be right about things. Can you feel the excitement?

Buzzmaster: Joe is here to answer your questions!

I'm here to flippantly answer his answers! No one asked me to do this!

Maryville Tennesssee: What do you think about Kenny Rodgers and what was on his hand?

SportsNation Joe Morgan: Whatever was on his hand was illegal. Let's start with that. I know it wasn't dirt. You can't have a foreign substance on your hand, that's the rule. Obviously, he took it off after the first inning and you wouldn't think he was doing anything illegal.

Well, we got that shocking twist out of the way fast. I think Joe's right on here. Kenny Rogers had pine tar on his hand and that's illegal. That's pretty much the end of the story, except for the weird fact that Tony La Russa decided to screw his own team over and not get rid of a guy who had pitched, at that point, 16 consecutive scoreless innings. Congratulations, Joe, on your third correct answer of the season!

Kevin (New Hyde Park, NY): Hey Joe, can MLB take any actions against Kenny Rogers if there are enough complaints from other teams? It is a foreign substance and he should be suspended. Isn't that the rules despite the umpire's discretion?

SportsNation Joe Morgan: That is definitely the rules. That you're suspended and kicked out of the game immediately. Not only on your hand, but your body, like a nail file. I don't know if they can take action now because they didn't go to the mound to look at his hand. We're only seeing a TV replay and therefore they can't because they didn't inspect him. Without that, they can't suspend him.

SportsNation Joe Morgan: La Russa let him off and I think Tony's reasoning was he didn't want to hurt the image of the World Series and baseball at that point.

Wow. I'm speechless. Joe sort of scores again. He's vaguely right for almost the entirety of his answer. Look, Kevin in New Hyde Park, major league baseball is not going to go back and retroactively suspend a guy when their own umpires let him off the hook after choosing not to inspect his clearly pine tarred pitching hand. That [sic] is definitely the rules.

Michael (New York) : What Tigers hitters do you see breaking out during the next few games in St. Louis?

SportsNation Joe Morgan: I'm surprised that Pudge Rodriguez is 0 for his last 16 or 17 or whwatever, because he's such a good hitter. Part of the reason he's struggling is because he's a catcher and he's worn down. With the week off, I thought he'd be rejuvenated. So he's the guy I'd pick to break out and they need him!

I'm surprised Stumpy One Leg Carrigan is 0 for his last 16 or 17 races or whatever, because he's such a good sprinter. Part of the reason he's struggling is because he lost his leg in a giant Venus fly trap accident. With his new fake leg, I thought he'd be rejuvenated even though he's proven since he got the new leg that he's not. So he's still the guy I'm picking to break out and Team Physical Deformity needs him!

Marquette Michigan: Are the Tigers still the favorite?

SportsNation Joe Morgan: I don't think so anymore. I thought they had the edge because they had home-field, but that's gone now. No one has home-field now. There's 3 in St. Louis and 2 in Detroit now, so I think the edge switches to St. Louis. Again, a lot depends on who steps up in this series. Detroit has a lot of ways to score runs and wins. The Cardinals basically revolve around Pujols and Rolen right now, so that's the way it is. Those two guys can lead you to victory, but the Tigers have an overall better chance of scoring runs that St. Louis at this time.

Thank god. Always Wrong Joe is back.

I don't think so anymore. I thought they had the edge because they had home-field, but that's gone now.

That's wrong. They had the edge because they were the better team, with vastly better pitching and arguably better hitting, as well. They won twelve more games in a considerably better league. Twelve.

No one has home-field now.

What? No. That's wrong. St. Louis has home field advatange. Anyone with a game schedule and the ability to count to two and then three can see that this is wrong.

There's 3 in St. Louis and 2 in Detroit now, so I think the edge switches to St. Louis.

But -- but you just said no one has home field. Which is it? The way this reads, it also seems like Joe only "thinks" three is a larger number than two. (Two has a lot of upside and intangibles that sometimes can make it larger than three.)

Again, a lot depends on who steps up in this series.

Sometimes, two steps up, and then who's larger, huh, three? This sentence is akin to saying: "a lot depends on who wins more of the remaining games."

Detroit has a lot of ways to score runs and wins.

Instead of this being a typo, I'm going to believe that Joe regularly uses the phrase "let's go out there and score some wins, boys." And he's talking to himself as he silently plays a fortieth game of the Solitaire that comes with Windows.

The Cardinals basically revolve around Pujols and Rolen right now, so that's the way it is. Those two guys can lead you to victory, but the Tigers have an overall better chance of scoring runs that St. Louis at this time.

A syntactic and semantic mess. I missed you, Always Wrong Joe. Good to have you back.

Utek (LA): Since Rogers pitched 6 shutout innings without the gunk on his hand, are we making too big a deal about this? I'd rather games were won and lost on the field and not over disputes in the rule book.

SportsNation Joe Morgan: Are you saying you'd like to play without a rulebook? If not, the bases aren't 90 feet apart and the mound isn't 60'6" away. Rules are there to make sure the game is played fairly. The umpires role is to make sure the game is played fairly, not just to call balls and strikes like many think. If the pine tar wasn't there to help him, then why was it there. You can't ignore the rules. If you didn't have laws, we'd have chaos, and the same applies to baseball.

I'm siding with Joe on this one, but more than that, I'm very much enjoying Pissy, Supermelodramatic Joe, who makes a strong showing in this response. "If you didn't have laws, we'd have chaos!!!" We're talking about poop on a guy's hand. I'm going to set up Joe to write the next Michael Bay movie.

Soren (LA): So Joe, if you were in Tony LaRussa's situation what would you have done?

SportsNation Joe Morgan: Let's not put me in Tony's situation, but if I'm the manager I just say go check him. Tony didn't want to hurt the image of the World Series. I don't want to hurt the image of the game itself. But he's a manager and I'm a broadcaster.

Joe. Joe. Soren (LA) doesn't have the ability to Judge Reinhold you into Tony La Russa's body. Cool out, man. I like the last sentence, in which Joe reminds us what he and Tony do for a living. This in no way helps us reconcile their difference of opinion on Poopgate.

Bobby (Wilmington): I respect LaRussa for what he's trying to do for the integrity of the Series.. but don't you think that in this age of people labeling cheaters, that the uncertainty of 'dirtgate' will forever be associated with this year?

SportsNation Joe Morgan: I agree with you, but I'm trying to give Tony's side of the story. I understand what he was thinking, but if I was in that position I would try to expose it. It doesn't mean I'm wrong and that Tony's wrong. It's just what I would do.

SportsNation Joe Morgan: I just hate cheating.

SportsNation Joe Morgan: I never looked off anybody's paper on a test. That's cheating and I hate that.

I like to imagine Joe furiously leaning over his Apple IIe and typing this answer while loosening his tie and wiping his forehead with a dirty rag. Between responses one and two, steam comes out of his ears. Between responses two and three, a cartoon devil appears on his shoulder and shrikes in his ear, "But what about the time you copied off of Bobby Bakersville in second grade, Joe? What about that?" And then Joe screams out his answer in anguish and also enters it into the chat field by mistake.

And can we talk about "It doesn't mean I'm wrong and that Tony's wrong"? Of course it doesn't. That's logistically impossible.

Jeff (Cleveland): Hey Joe...what was your favorite ballpark that you played in (besides Riverfront)?

SportsNation Joe Morgan: That's a tough one. Probably Wrigley Field and Dodger Stadium.

SportsNation Joe Morgan: I just hate cheating.

SportsNation Joe Morgan: I never looked off anybody's paper on a test. That's cheating and I hate that.

I added those last two answers. But you believed Joe typed that again, didn't you?

Labels: ,

posted by Junior  # 2:16 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

Monday, October 23, 2006


I'm Sure This Observation Has Been Made Before

Chris Berman's "Fastest Three Minutes," during halftime of MNF on ESPN, feel to me like the longest three consecutive minutes I've ever experienced in my life.


posted by dak  # 10:28 PM
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Mrs. Tremendous refers to Berman as "that man who yells at me." It always makes me laugh.
Post a Comment

<< Home

The David Eckstein Memorial Eckstein of the Year Award

Finally, they did it. Major League Baseball and Holiday Inn proudly bring you the David Eckstein Memorial Ecksteiniest Eckstein of the Year Eck-ward, also known as the Holiday Inn Look Again Player of the Year. What does this steaming dump of a horse load award commemorate?

Behind every great team on the diamond, lurking in the shadow of baseball superstars, live the role players who sacrifice for their team in often unrecognized effort. Which of these role players' best deserves recognition for their contributions as the Holiday Inn Look Again Player of the Year?

The apostrophe behind the second "role players" is sic. Here's my translation from adver-marketing bullshit-speak into English:

Behind all the great colored and Latino or whatever the fuck players who are actually good at baseball, in the deep dark shadow-realm of guys who only make $3 to 8 million dollars a year, live the role players whose jobs are so torturous and awful that other grown humans pay to see them and applaud when they walk into their offices. White, tiny, albino, and white, these Ecksteins, proto-Ecksteins, and mega-Ecksteins need more love from crappy budget-priced motel chains and you, the paying fan. Which of these Ecksteins is the Eckiest? The answer: David Eckstein.

Here is David Eckstein's name and the names of the guys who will lose to David Eckstein:

American League
Angels: Robb Quinlan
Athletics: Mark Kotsay
Blue Jays: Reed Johnson
Devil Rays: Ty Wiggingon
Indians: Jake Westbrook
Mariners: Jake Woods
Orioles: Brian Roberts
Rangers: Mark DeRosa
Red Sox: Kevin Youkilis
Royals: Mark Grudzielanek
Tigers: Brandon Inge
Twins: Jason Tyner
White Sox: Joe Crede
Yankees: Scott Proctor

National League
Astros: Chris Burke
Braves: Brian McCann
Brewers: Brian Shouse
Cardinals: David Eckstein
Cubs: John Mabry
Diamondbacks: Eric Byrnes
Dodgers: Andre Ethier
Giants: Mark Sweeney
Marlins: Wes Helms
Mets: Jose Valentin
Nationals: Nick Johnson
Padres: Woody Williams
Phillies: Shane Victorino
Pirates: John Grabow
Reds: Ryan Freel
Rockies: Garrett Atkins

Notice anything? Yep, two non-whiteys. White people: role players who are always sacrificing for the glory of the non-whites.

Also, how the fuck does Erstad get left off this list? I'm hopping mad over this. Here's my "Holiday Inn Look Again, Look Again Award Nomination Committee" Official List of Snubs:

Darin Erstad
Trot Nixon
Scott Podsednik
Paul Lo Duca
Derek Jeter
Instead of nominating John Grabow for the Pirates, they should have just nominated Eckstein again

I'm sort of torn over who to vote for here. It's such an odd mix of guys who had legitimately great seasons (Crede, DeRosa, McCann), startlingly mediocre starters (Jakes Woods and Westbrook), and absolutely irrelevant middle relievers (Brian Shouse???). A large part of me wants to throw the thing for the absolute worst player on the list. Is it Shouse, with his 34.0 innings of 1.50 WHIP ball? How about Grabow, with 69.2 IP and a 1.43 WHIP? No, wait. Of course it's John Mabry: dude posted a .205/.283/.324 (EqA of .214)! He scored 16 runs in 107 games. Wow. John Mabry.

Who am I fucking kidding? I'm voting for Eckstein.


posted by Junior  # 3:48 PM
If you're wondering, about 60% of Major League Baseball players are white. At least, as of last year, according to this thing.

Which has to make you wonder even more about the 93% of whitey-ness eligible for this Eckstein situation.
Right. This list is NHL-level white, not just MLB-level white. Which is defensible if there is some set of relatively objective criteria -- for instance, in recent years, it seems like white guys are underrepresented in the MVP voting. But I'm pretty sure that's due to actual things that have actually happened on a baseball field.

This award is based on made-up things in people's imaginations.
Eckstein is absolutely dominating this thing, with 30% of the NL vote. Pity actual no-names Brian Shouse, Wes Helms and Jake Woods, so overlooked as to only garner 1% of the vote in a contest to see who the most overlooked player is.
Post a Comment

<< Home

Hate To Interrupt Doodoo-on-handgate For This

Doesn't it seem like even Tim Kurkjian himself has trouble pronouncing the name Tim Kurkjian?


posted by dak  # 3:50 AM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

kenny rogers dirt pine tar

I'm pretty happy that a Google search for

kenny rogers dirt pine tar

spits back FJM as the second result.

Anyway, does anyone believe Rogers' explanation for that brown, shit-like shit on his hand?

"It was a big clump of dirt," Rogers said after the game. "I didn't know it was there. They told me about [sic], but it was no big deal."

First off, it didn't look like dirt. I wish I had a screencap on hand.

** EDIT **

Within seconds, I was sent a couple of different shots. Here's one:

Actually, it's pretty hard to tell what it is. Whatever it is, it's poopy-looking.

** END EDIT **

Second, you didn't know it was there? You didn't realize the hand you use to pitch the baseball was covered in dirt? Listen, Kenny, I wasn't born on a strawberry farm like you were.

When asked how he could have a big clump of dirt on his hand, Rogers replied, "It was dirt and rosin put together. That's what happens when you rub it up. … I just went and wiped if off. I didn't think it was an issue. After the first inning, it was fine. I felt I was pretty comfortable after that."

Tomorrow, I'm buying a big bag of rosin and a big bag of dirt, mixing them up together, rubbing the resulting mixture on my left hand, putting on a full Tigers uniform and photographing my left hand as I simulate a changeup. Then we'll see if that's what happens when you rub it up!

How much do you think a bag of dirt costs?

After the substance was noticed, ESPN reviewed tapes of Rogers' pitching performances earlier in the postseason. The tapes revealed that, in starts against both the Yankees and Athletics, a similar-looking brown substance was spotted on Rogers' hand.

You're kidding. Do you think maybe you could show us those pictures, ESPN? No, you're good? Okay, cool. You just go on ahead there and keeping worldwidely leading sports worldwide.


And they've added pictures! Congratulations. Karl Ravech is still sticking with MLB's story that it was dirt on SportsCenter right now.

Labels: ,

posted by Junior  # 1:48 AM
Also, God help me: John Kruk is making the very valid point that there is no way Kenny Rogers didn't know what was on his own pitching hand.
Post a Comment

<< Home

Sunday, October 22, 2006


This Is Our Country

1. Before the game, on ESPN Radio, Joe Morgan:

I think we may have underestimated the Cardinals' pitching staff because it's been patchmeal.

2. Even I'm tired of typing the words "small sample size." But it seems the likeliest explanation for how notorious playoff choker Kenny Rogers is now clutch playoff hero Kenny Rogers. Up until this year, Kenny had been horrendous in the playoffs -- for exactly 20 and 1/3 innings. So we all knew he couldn't get it done under the bright lights of the postseason. Until now, right after he puts together a crazy 23-inning scoreless streak. Here's something, though -- the aggregate of the two Kennys? A total playoff ERA of 4.15. Kenny's career regular season ERA? 4.19.

3. Small sample size, part 2: We're still awfully close to having an 83-win team be crowned the best in all of baseball. The Cardinals finished the year with the 13th most victories in the majors, and that doesn't take into account the difference in quality between the AL and the NL. Five teams with a better record didn't even make the playoffs. This is our country.

Labels: ,

posted by Junior  # 11:36 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

WS Game 1, FOX Pre-Game Observations

1. Were I a member of Eric Byrnes’ immediate family, I might be more than a little worried about the current state of his mental health.

2. Fox has still not granted women the right to predict who will win the World Series. (Kennedy: Tigers in 6; Byrnes: Tigers; Zelasko: toss to commercial)

3. Nothing – and I mean nothing – represents the zeitgeist of the 2006 Detroit Tigers better than Architecture In Helsinki.

(I tried to get this up 4 hours ago but Blogger has been down. Oh well.)

Labels: , ,

posted by dak  # 12:14 AM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

Friday, October 20, 2006



I'm not a huge fan of making predictions about who's going to win a given series, or the whole postseason, or what have you. I very much enjoy talking about who has a better chance of winning, and for what reasons, et cetera. But I see little reason in saying anything like "I'm picking Twins in 6." I guess maybe it's fun? (Not a big fan of fun things.)

So generally speaking, I don't really care what people's predictions are.

But then...once in a while...19 baseball experts from the nation's leading sports network try to predict which team will win the World Series, and not one of them even picks a team that makes it to the World Series, let alone wins it.

And that, I kind of feel like, is worth pointing out.

I know what you're thinking: what are the chances that this could happen, assuming even that the ESPN analysts have monkey-throwing-raisins-at-a-dartboard level of guessing ability? And by "this," I mean 19 picks for World Series champs not even making the World Series.

Well, the chances that any given ("random") playoff team makes the World Series is 1 out of 4. In this case, 19 people missed what would have been a 1 out of 4 chance, if they had just simply "guessed" (at random). To measure the probability of this, we have to think in these terms: 19 people in a row "hit" a 3 out of 4 chance. What are the chances of that? .75^19 = .00423, or .42%

In other words, the anlaysts could have thrown all of their baseball knowledge out the third floor window of the Bristol megaplex, picked a random team to win the World Series...and there would have been less than a 1 in 200 chance that zero of their picks would get to the World Series. (Which, just to remind everyone, is exactly what happened.)

But wait! It gets better.

Looking further at these picks -- and I'm sure someone pointed this out before -- not one single person picked the Tigers to even get out of the ALDS. And only one person picked the Cards to beat the Padres in the NLDS.

Which means (stay with me) in the combined series of: Yanks / Tigers ALDS, Padres / Cards NLDS, ALCS, NLCS, and WS, the 19 ESPN experts went a total of 1 for 95. ONE FOR NINETY-FUCKING-FIVE.

If you let 10,000 teams of 19 monkeys randomly pick winners in those series, those monkey-picking-teams would average 30.9 out of 95. (.5 for 38 DS picks + .25 for 38 CS picks + .125 for 19 WS picks)

Congratulations to Enrique Rojas, the only person who picked either the World Series bound Tigers or Cardinals to win even one series. He also picked El Duque as the WS MVP in a victory over the Twins.

EDIT: I'd like to take a second to address two categories of e-mails I'm getting from a lot of readers.

Category 1 is best summed up by e-mailer CJ:
"You're giving them too much credit. Each of nineteen guys failed to connect on TWO one in four chances. If everyone picked at random, the probability that any one guy would fail to pick either wold series team is (.75 * .75) = .5625. Raise that to the 19th power and you get 0.0000178, or 1 in 55933."

On its own, this is true. And "more" impressive. As for accusations that I was wrong, however (which were often made), I stand by my original numbers. I was looking at the chances of a different phenomenon. ("And by 'this,' I mean 19 picks for World Series champs not even making the World Series.")

So, dudes who wrote -- excellent point. The chances of going 0-38 in CS Champs picks are even more astronomically difficult than going 0-19 in WS Champs picks not even making the WS. But I was right also. Sweet.

On to Category 2 now, as written by the beautifully named Alessio, who is probably a dude but in my imagination is a gorgeous 23-year-old woman from like Monaco who loves baseball and statistical analysis. I quote him (her? please?) at length because it's easier than writing this all out myself:

I'm no statistician, but I think you made an analytical error in your post on "picks". The chances of what happened are not nearly as distant as you calculate. In fact, you're far more likely to get such results from intelligent decision makers than from random chance.

The fact that human beings are picking will tend to "bunch" the picks a lot more than random chance. For example, let's say the Yankees are better than the Tigers, and everybody recognizes that. Everybody will pick the Yankees, so the picks could rationally be 19-0 even though their actual chances of winning might be something like 55%. When the Tigers beat those odds, all of a sudden you have 19 wrong picks, although there's only one upset in the series.

Now, when you have three or four series upsets (nothing unusual there), all of a sudden you have a whole lot more than 19 wrong picks.

When you have a consensus on the various team strengths, combined with just a few upsets, you get the seemingly anomolous result of a bunch of prognosticators going 1-for-95. A random picking system would almost never be that bad; but on the other hand, it would almost always be around 50%. The humans could just as easily have been around 90% if those series had gone the other way.

Alessio. My sweet, innocent Alessio. Alesssssio, my princess of Monaco... [daydreaming now: playing with Alessio's hair; engaging in conversation about VORP vs. WARP3 over mussels and realizing instead that Alessio is almost certainly a 45-year-old dude from Canton, Ohio or something, and on top of that, feeling the obligation to publicly apoligize to girlfriend about the whole Alessio-fantasy situation]...sorry, what now?

Oh, the numbers thing.

Yeah. Well, Alessio, you fat fucking ugly monster of a man, you make what I guess is a good point. I guess my response is: yes, of course. Of course humans will, over the long haul, be better than random-team generators at predicting who wins certain games / series / whatever. I realize why, especially in this case, the experts were especially bad at picking winners. Your point is spot on: a rational human being will pick the 55%-likely-to-win team, and, likewise, so will 19 rational humans. I'm just trying to put a scenario together that sort of points out the whole ridiculousness of "predictions" in general.

Listen: It's a cheat. I cheated. And that's the kind of thing you do when you run a blog devoted to making analysts look silly.

You take advantage of a combination of hindsight, upsets, and odd numbers, and use them in a way to make people silly. And you sort of hope, I guess, that people make their own conclusions about just how much these numbers actually mean.

To me, the overall point is not that we should let monkeys throw raisins at a dartboard instead of letting experts make their predictions. But rather, isn't it kind of silly / interesting / amusing that in this particular case, a team of monkeys would have been almost a sure bet against these so-called experts?

That's all. Interpret at your own risk.

Sorry / Thanks to Alessio, whose appearance and gender remain an absolute, delicious mystery to me.

Labels: , ,

posted by dak  # 3:14 AM
I picked a 2006 Tigers-Cardinals World Series way back in 1994. What are the odds of that?
Turns out Alessio is a 25-year-old dude.

Goodbye, boner!
And now for the sake of pure hypocrisy, I am going to predict the Cards as WS winners in 6 games.

I find comfort in knowing that I can't be any more wrong than Karl Ravech.
I am sticking with Yanks over Pads in 5.
Post a Comment

<< Home

Thursday, October 19, 2006


Going Back For A Second that e-mail that Simmons posted (see Junior's post below).

Dude wrote: "In 1996-2000, it wasn't just that they had great chemistry (which they did), they didn't have nearly as much offensive talent so they were forced to play true October baseball."

Hmm. How much less offensive talent did they really have during that 5-year stretch?

In 2006, the Yankees scored 930 runs.

In the World Series Championship year of 1998, they scored 965.

From 1996-200, they averaged 899.6 runs / year. Compared against the 2006 juggernauts, that's a difference of 30.4 runs, or .19 runs / game.

And this difference in offensive talent (am I measuring it wrong?) is meant to be enough to explain the problem with the 2006 Yankees? At this point, I'm even willing to let go of the far more ridiculous assertion: that the problem is that they had too much talent.

Side note: in the 1998 World Series, the only series for which I currently have the energy to make the following calculations, the Yankees also scored 15 out of 26 of their runs on HRs. Or 54%. Or a percent that would have led MLB any of the years for which I've been able to find data. And yes, you should ignore those numbers because the sample size is tiny.

Labels: ,

posted by dak  # 8:17 PM
2006 Yankees (not built for postseason, good hitters clogging up the end of the lineup, relying too much on three-run homers): 210 home runs

1998 Yankees (hit-and-running, stealing at every opportunity, taking extra bases, bunting): 207 home runs


I'm now waiting for Jose Valentin and Paul Lo Duca to get in the batters' box together, put their hands on the same bat, and swing away to hit a walk-off grand slam.
Very, very surprised that Jose Valentin struck out instead of hitting a grand slam there. Pleasantly.
I wonder if Willie Randolph would've rather have had Alex Rodriguez and Gary Sheffield come up with the bases loaded over Valentin and Chavez.
My guess: hell no.
Not to quibble Jr., but it is worth noting how little the Buck-McCarver team extolled Endy Chavez's catch. We might have seen the single greatest postseason defensive play in the Division Series era (particularly if the Mets end up winning). I guess my point is generally that the pro-Cards bias has been unbelievable this series. Did you catch McCarver trying to spin Pujols's quotes about Glavine the other night? If Delgado had said the same about Carpenter, all we would have heard about all night is how Delgado hates America because he won't stand for the anthem 5 years ago (when the U.S. was using his native land as mortar dump.) McCarver-Buck are not good at their jobs.
They were pretty reserved, you're right! I was only using all caps because it sure is funny that after I blasted Endy and Jose and Paul just hours ago, one of them came through and may have saved the game for the Mets, thus undoubtedly reinforcing Jonathan T.'s confidence in his Role Players Win Games Theory.

Also, the stuff about Endy not hitting well in the playoffs so far is mainly just me crying.
Wow, I'm old. It was 10 years ago.
Perez and Suppan, huh?

Ok, it was 2 years ago. I got that from an abbreviated Google entry that ellipsied into a bit about Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf in the '95-'96 season. We've all been there, right fellas?
I hear you, Jr. For the record, I find it easier to root for the Mets knowing that Willie Randolph's daughter loves to watch Endy Chavez play the game. Ok, I'll stop clogging up the comments board.
Hey Junior / Coach:
Get a room.

Am I right?
I can't believe Chavez didn't get that one.
Man, McCarver and Buck seem to be giving an awful lot of credit to LaRussa for that Molina HR.

LaRussa moved him up one slot in the order...and that's why he went yard?

Truth is, if Yadier had been in the same position as he usually was, he "would've" hit the HR in even more dramatic fashion, with 2 out in the 9th.
You guys, I think we might be "live-blogging."
Please please please let Paul Lo Duca knock in Valentin and Chavez, fulfilling the horrific Jonathan T. prophecy.
Yadier Molina: 1 HR per 69.5 AB this season.
Isn't it weird when it's raining at baseball games, and it looks from some angles like it's pouring, and then from other shots like it's not even raining at all?

(No, it is not that weird.)
I'm watching in HD, so it's actually raining in my room.
Oh my God the table is so set for Paul Heartandsoul Lo Duca to win this thing for role players everywhere.
Carlos Beltran, a man with 7 home runs in 13 career LCS games, strikes out on three pitches with the series on the line.

Yadier Molina, a man with 6 home runs in 129 games all season, wins it with a home run.

Eckstein does it again!!!
Post a Comment

<< Home


I finally got around to reading the Richard Griffin article that Junior assailed yesterday (see below, 18 Oct.). Here are a few more pieces of evidence Griffin gives that Billy Beane, and not Ken Macha, is at fault for the A's woes:

How could anyone blame Macha for losing to the Tigers? After second baseman Mark Ellis was injured, Beane gave Macha the combo of D'Angelo Jimenez and Mark Kiger. Jimenez may have been the worst starting second baseman in a playoff game this decade, while Kiger was making his MLB debut.

I could be wrong, but wasn't Ellis injured during the playoffs? Apparently, Beane was supposed to fly Robby Cano to Oakland, give him a fake moustache, and have him pretend to be Cobinson Rano: Oakland A's Second Baseman Who Is Totally On the Playoff Roster!

Ellis was also on the DL in early June, but I really believe that Griffin is blaming Beane for the A's not having an awesome backup 2nd baseman instantaneously in October. Now, that's not Macha's fault either. In fact, it's nobody's fault, really -- it's just bad luck. But as Junior's post below shows, there seem to be other things that are, in fact, Macha's fault. Like the fact that everyone on his team hated his guts.

During the regular season, when the A's were in Toronto, catcher Jason Kendall was suspended, so Beane elevated one of his Moneyball legends, overhyped draft choice, roly-poly catcher Jeremy Brown. Macha laughed in the face of a question about how much playing time Brown would get. "None."

Listen to me carefully, Richard Griffin. I have several points to make.

1. The fact that a catcher got suspended means that the GM, in this case Billy Beane, would be doing a huge disservice to his team by not putting another catcher on the team ASAP. So. They had a catcher in the minors, who is on the 40-man roster, who has decent AAA stats (.764 OPS, 13HR in 77 games -- not great, but workable), so he promoted him. What is the problem here?

2. Ken Macha laughing and being snarky about how much playing time a new guy is going to get is a dickish thing to do, and is exactly the kind of thing that got him fired.

3. Jason Kendall was out for four games. Four. So the worst thing that could have happened was that Jeremy Brown would be there for four games. In May.

4. In the last two full seasons, Jason Kendall, who makes $11 million a year, has OPSes of .709 and .666. In the minute sample size of MLB-level experience this year, Jeremy Brown was 3-10 with 2 2Bs. Career, 4-12. That shit ain't bad. Maybe Macha should have played him more. Or maybe he shouldn't've. But he definitely shouldn't have laughed at the question of how much the guy was going to play. What good does that do?

Macha's fault? During the ALCS against the Tigers, Nick Swisher lived up to his name, with five strikeouts in 10 at-bats, while ...another of Beane's prized drafts, Joe Blanton, was relegated to long relief.

In 2005 Joe Blanton made about $327,000 and won 12 games with an ERA of 3.53, giving up 178 hits in 201.1 IP. His OPS-against was .693. In 2006 he regressed terribly, his WHIP soaring to 1.54 (possibly due to some bad luck -- his K/BB stayed roughly the same and he actually gave up fewer HR). But tell me how Billy Beane is at fault for this. Is he the pitching coach too?

And as for Nick Swisher...I guess his .254/.372/.493/.865, 35 HR and 97 BB go right the fuck out the window in the face of three not so good games against the league's best pitching staff. Curse you, Billy Beane!!!!!!

Labels: ,

posted by Unknown  # 6:30 PM
Is "swishing" really a synonym for striking out?

Not buying it.
A number of Canadians have thanked us for finally mentioning Richard Griffin.

It seems as though he may be, dare I say, Canada's answer to HatGuy.

So to you, O Canada, I say on behalf of FJM: you're welcome, and go Oilers.
L'homme de chapeau?
Finissez l'emploi de Monsieur Richard Griffin!
Post a Comment

<< Home

Let Me Think ... Nope. Still Doesn't Make Sense.

Bill Simmons just printed and heartily endorsed an email I'm not totally on board with. Take a look:

Anyway, out of all the Yankee fans I heard from, the most rational argument came from Jonathan T., who sent along the following post-mortem:

"In 1996-2000, it wasn't just that they had great chemistry (which they did), they didn't have nearly as much offensive talent so they were forced to play true October baseball. The current Yankee lineup isn't built for the postseason. You just can't rely on three-run homers with the great pitching in the playoffs, while you can in much of the regular season (especially playing Tampa and Baltimore 38 times). With a great set of contact hitters and speed guys --Damon, Jeter, Abreu, Melky, Cano -- this team should be hit-and-running, stealing at every opportunity, taking extra bases, bunting, etc. However, with power hitters like Sheffield and A-Rod clogging up the end of the lineup (such as Game 4, when A-Rod hit eighth), they can't. There is actually TOO MUCH talent. Are you honestly going to bunt with runners on first and second and no one out with the 25-million-dollar man up? Of course not. But if former eighth-place-hitter Scott Brosius is up, it's a no-brainer. So it's not just their lack of chemistry but the fact that playoff teams thrive off role players. Even if you take a loaded team like the Mets, they still have guys like Endy Chavez, Jose Valentin and Paul Lo Duca. Baseball front offices, regardless of the payroll, should build their teams like baseball teams, not fantasy baseball teams."

(Note: The Yankees are NOT allowed to hire Jonathan T. as their VP of Common Sense. I'm never handing over his e-mail address. Ever.)

Huh. So Jonathan, your argument is that the Yankees had too much offensive talent. Really.

I'll be charitable and throw out the obvious FJM-bait of "great chemistry" and "true October baseball." Let's examine what's really being put forth here. Jonathan is saying that postseason baseball is qualitatively different from regular season baseball. I'm listening. Why is it different? The only answer Jonathan gives is "great pitching." Okay. I'll accept that the pitching is probably, on average, better in the postseason than in the regular season (today's NLCS Game 7 notwithstanding). So far, so good. Now it gets tricky, though. It's Jonathan's claim that because the pitching is better, it is incumbent on all successful playoff teams to do the following: "hit-and-running, stealing at every opportunity, taking extra bases, bunting, etc." The "etc." stands for Ecksteining. Actually, everything in between the quotation marks stands for Ecksteining.

I'm not buying it. Is there any evidence that shows that the benefits of these strategies are increased against better pitching? That we should replace Alex Rodriguezes and Gary Sheffields with bunting Endy Chavezes and sacrificing Jose Valentins? Think about it. Seriously. If you play these games a hundred times, in what crazy nightmare simulacrum are you voluntarily going to war with Endy and Jose over Alex and Gary?

Basically: do you want shittier hitters because you're facing better pitchers? Because that's what Jonathan is saying.

And let's move from the general to the specific. Did the Yankees lose to the Tigers because dozens of men were left on base, just begging to be sacrificed over? Nope. It was much simpler: they weren't on base enough to begin with. In Game 3, they were held to five hits and two walks the whole game. To win the game in nine innings, they would've had to have gotten every single one of those guys in via the hit-and-run-and-steal-and-bunt method somehow. Game 4 was even worse. Nine innings: six hits, one walk. That's it. Not to mention the fact that by the time the Yankees got on base for the first time, they were already down 7-0. Remember Jeremy Bonderman's five perfect innings to start the game? Remember that, Jonathan? Game 2 was the only game the Yankees lost while getting a decent number of men on base. They lost that one 4-3. But you know why they were so close in that one? A goddamn three-run homer. No wonder they lost -- can't have those in the playoffs.

The Yankees' "greatest lineup in history" wasn't actually the greatest lineup in history for those four games because Gary Sheffield and Hideki Matsui were still coming back from injuries and Jason Giambi was pretty messed up, too. Joe Torre decided that those guys at 50 or 75% were still better than 100% mediocre Melky Cabrera or 100% terrible Andy Phillips. I think that's a perfectly defensible position. On top of that, for two games, Kenny Rogers and Jeremy Bonderman were lights out. Even those awesome hitters weren't getting on base against them.

So it's not just their lack of chemistry but the fact that playoff teams thrive off role players.

That's right: in the playoffs, role players are more important than good players. That's just good ol' common sense.

Even if you take a loaded team like the Mets, they still have guys like Endy Chavez, Jose Valentin and Paul Lo Duca.

How are Endy Chavez, Jose Valentin and Paul Lo Duca that different from Melky Cabrera, Robinson Cano and Jorge Posada? Also, fuck you for suggesting that any of those guys are better than Gary Sheffield or Alex Rodriguez (or, I'm sorry -- more useful in the playoffs against great pitching because teams thrive off of role players in the postseason, like everybody knows). I mean, seriously. I've been civil for like nine hundred words. But that is just fucking ridiculous.

P.S. "Clogging up the end of the lineup"??? You win a goddamn Dusty Baker Award. Wear it with pride, my friend.

P.P.S. Let us never forget that Bill Simmons says this is the "most rational" argument he has heard and suggests that Jonathan would make an excellent "VP of Common Sense" for a baseball team. Never forget.


posted by Junior  # 5:44 PM
I didn't put any cheap shots in the post, so here's one:

Endy Chavez should replace the name on the back of his jersey with the words "TRUE OCTOBER BASEBALL."

Other guys, feel free to join in.

Another P.S. He's using the Mets as an example of how to succeed in the playoffs? The same Mets who had to scrape and claw against the horrendous Cardinals to force a Game 7?
A lot more bunting and stealing would have totally compensated for the fact that the Yankees' pitching gave up 14 runs in Games 3 and 4.

Maybe they should have gotten Endy Chavez to pitch in those games.
I think a thank you is in order to the literally tens of FJM readers who e-mailed this one to us.
Post a Comment

<< Home

McCarver, Game 6, NLCS

Anyone else hear him, bottom of the 7th, after Yadier Molina made a terrible throw to 2nd following a pitchout, allowing Michael Tucker to steal 2nd safely?

"By guessing right, they may have guessed wrong."

How is making a bad throw in any way "guessing wrong"? It's like the try-to-make-things-sound-clever part of his brain is eating all the other parts of his brain.

Also I have a fun game to pass along: any time you read a gossip headline about "Macca" and the crazy breastmilk / stabbing / bedpan allegations made by his ex-wife, imagine that it's actually about Tim McCarver and not Paul McCartney.

I'll tell you what -- it made my day about .4% more enjoyable!

EDIT: after reading some e-mail verifications (thanks Kevin -- but it was Yadier, not Bengie), it appears that indeed McCarver, and not I, am the crazy one.

Labels: ,

posted by dak  # 3:38 AM
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Post a Comment

<< Home

Wednesday, October 18, 2006


I Don't See Any Problem With This

Today, Toronto Star, Richard Griffin:

Macha not a true believer
A's canned him because he wasn't a Moneyball guy

Those fourteen beautiful words tell the whole story.

On Monday, Ken Macha became the sixth major-league manager fired since Oct. 1. A's GM Billy Beane, in making the announcement, claimed there was a "disconnect on a lot of levels." The disconnect seems to be that the ego-driven Beane cannot find anyone to religiously manage by the book — his book, Moneyball.

If you take the trouble to write a book about baseball, the least your manager can do is try to abide by it.

"There were things that transpired over the course of the year that the players were unhappy about,'' A's center fielder Mark Kotsay said.

How'd that get in there? Ignore that. Back to the real story:

Now, we're getting as tired as anyone else of the baseball term originally coined as the title of a Michael Lewis book on how to compete on a limited budget by going against the grain of traditional baseball thinking.

Amen! Macha had the players' support. It was Beane's megalomania and Moneyball-worship that probably cost the A's the World Series this year.

"I felt like he didn't protect me,'' Zito said. "I know a lot of managers do -- (White Sox first baseman) Paul Konerko told me that Ozzie Guillen would take a bullet for his players. I was upset but Macha was fighting his own battle and he probably couldn't process that kind of pressure, so, OK, I'll wear it.''

Like many other things once new, Moneyball has become old. It doesn't work because now everybody does at least a little outside the box thinking. It's like comparing Ozzy Osbourne of the '70s to Osbourne today. No more edge.

Just like the A's, Ozzy doesn't know how to do the little things anymore. When was the last time you saw Ozzy lay down a sacrifice bunt and give himself up for the team? Not recently enough, if you ask me.

"I know that the one thing any player wants from his manager is to be protected,'' catcher Jason Kendall said. "If there's a bang-bang play at first, even if you're out, if you're arguing you want someone there behind you. If you argue a pitch, even if you're wrong, you want someone joining in. And I'm not sure Macha did that.''

The point about the Beane and Macha lack of chemistry is that Macha never bought into Moneyball and often, with a dry, somewhat quirky sense of humour, would let his true feelings come out in quotes not always flattering to the talents of the players he was given by Beane.

It's the manager's right -- no, his duty -- to tear down his players every chance he gets. That's smallball. The kind of ball we used to play in the good ol' small days. When managers made players feel small.

"When I got injured, I felt disrespected,'' Kotsay said. "The 'puzzling' comment really threw me. My manager didn't have my back, and every manager's first business is to protect his players. That totally lost my trust in that relationship, between us as player and manager.''

When Little was fired in Boston after '03 due to the Yankees playoff debacle, Macha's bench coach Terry Francona (also not a big fan of Moneyball) was hired by the Sox and went on to win the World Series.

Who could forget Terry Francona's two-run walkoff homer to win Game 4 of the ALCS? Or his grand slam in the second inning of Game 7? Everyone will always remember the famous Francona bloody sock game. If there's one thing that's for sure, it's this: Moneyball principles had absolutely nothing to do with the Red Sox winning the World Series. It was the handiwork of one man: Terry Francona.

"The atmosphere wasn't positive, for some reason,'' Chavez said. "That was hard for us to deal with -- here we are, winning the division, we're banged up but we're still doing what we should be doing, and every time he spoke to us, he'd say how much appreciated the effort, but then you'd read things where he was always smashing people. ... This negative cloud was just eating at everybody.''

Clearly, Macha knew what Beane always thought of him. It was only Macha's success of making it to the post-season with a great second-half that kept Beane's wolves at bay.

Ken Fucking Second Half Macha. The only reason the A's were any good, ever. Preach on, brother!

"The fact is, when you have someone leading people, you want them to be a visionary, to forge ahead and be on the front lines,'' Zito said. "We felt like we were on the front lines, and he might have been with us but he didn't have the same conviction or faith. I think it was a fear of failure. He was a little more focused on the pessimistic stuff than on success.''

Beane always blames managers, but the fact is the A's were just not deep enough or good enough to advance to the World Series. Macha is a National League manager, with a love of small-ball. The A's was his first opportunity to manage in the big leagues, so he was willing to take whatever Beane offered, to get his foot in the door. He is better off moving on.

Like Francona before him, the guess here is that Macha, with another managerial job, will earn a World Series chance before Beane ever does.

Not one word of this article is out of place. God bless you, Richard Griffin. God bless you, you brave, brave man.

"Deep down inside, I think he cared about the players, he just didn't have a good way of communicating,'' Chavez said. "He was always asking me about guys, he wanted to know if they were OK, but I was always the one he talked to in his office and I was probably the one who least needed to be in there.''


posted by Junior  # 8:10 PM
Thanks to reader Jim for pointing us to this gem from Richard Griffin's past:

Jays GM J.P. Ricciardi along with Oakland's Billy Beane and other new-wavers believe in building offence through patience at the plate and taking no chances on the bases. That's a pre-WWII style of play. Under those criteria, Jackie Robinson could not have played in the majors.

Jackie Robinson. The dude with the .409 lifetime OBP.

Could not have played in the majors.
The 1927 Yankees happened post-WWII, right?
Post a Comment

<< Home


Please -- please -- vote Frank Catalanotto for MLB's most-clutch left-fielder. It is very important to me.

Having a vote for "most clutch" baseball player is like having a vote for "most real" monster.


posted by Unknown  # 3:22 PM
I for one believe that John Lithgow is a real monster.
Post a Comment

<< Home

Tuesday, October 17, 2006


What Do You Think?

I'm having a hard time making up my mind. Dave Newhouse, a writer for Inside Bay Area, just wrote a column called

The right man for A's job: Dusty Baker

This is, to say the least, unconventional thinking. He goes on:

THE OAKLAND A'S need a new manager, but not just any ordinary manager. They need that special someone who can carry them back to the World Series.

There is just such a man, and he is so obviously right for the job, Billy Beane should pick up the phone and hire him on the spot. Call collect, Billy, if necessary.

Dusty Baker is your man.

Remember, Billy Beane is a man who likes to clog up the basepaths. And we believe that Dusty Baker is the man who first disparaged clogging up the basepaths. These people, if I'm correctly identifying them, probably would not get along, especially not as co-workers.

If Beane hires Baker, maybe Barry Zito would take a few million less to play for this thoughtful man, who brings food to his players.

Although there's always that. Dusty makes a terrific baked ziti.

I'm thoroughly confused here. Did Dave Newhouse, someone who covers Bay Area baseball for a living, not read Moneyball? Did he read Moneyball and choose to willfully ignore all of the information contained within it? Does he not know who Dusty Baker is?

I'm going to go ahead and let you guys decide.

Dave Newhouse ...
hasn't read Moneyball.
has read Moneyball, but suffered a memory-altering BMX biking accident shortly thereafter
is the nom de plume of Dusty Baker
is a time traveler from the future posing as an online sportswriter but is doing poorly because he has to save the world from an impending disaster
Free polls from

Labels: , , ,

posted by Junior  # 4:11 PM
When I vote in polls, I like to pick what I deem to be the "funniest" answer rather than what I believe to be true. Imagine my surprise when my choice (B) was revealed to be the LEAST popular of the four. Even less than the REAL answer, which is quite obviously (C). And imagine my further surprise when I saw that over 2,000 humans had voted in this poll! Our readers' dedication is a source of constant pride.

Anyway, my point is: we should have more polls.
Post a Comment

<< Home

Monday, October 16, 2006


I Hope Mike Vrabel Reads This And Decides to Take His Vengeance By Consuming David Eckstein Whole

Peter King, to whom I think I'm indifferent, so I must be, decided to chip in with some baseball talk in today's Monday Morning Quarterback:

9. I think I hate to do this. I really do. We're in Week 6 of the football season, but I have to give some advice to Joe Torre and Brian Cashman right now, because they are decent men, even if they do work for the Evil Empire. Get in a car sometime this month, and drive 3½ hours up I-95 to Foxboro. Visit the Patriots. Or if you're inclined to go a place where you might be more invisible, fly to Chicago, rent a car and drive north to Lake Forest, where the Bears are headquartered. Learn how to build a winning team and how to navigate through the noise that disrupts every big-market team today.

Visit the Patriots. Watch them practice football. Notice how many of their players are football players. Look at the balls they use. Footballs. Notice their bats. They don't have any. Instead of hats, they wear hard metal round bowls that protect their heads. Watch them, and perhaps you will learn how to wear a dirty cutoff sweatshirt in the dugout instead of a uniform.

Because frankly, the fact that you've won 95 games nine out of the last ten years (and the year you didn't, you won the World Series) is embarrassing.

Football isn't baseball, you'll argue. Football is the ultimate team game, and baseball is more of a stars' game.

Football is more like football. Baseball is more like baseball.

But the one thing all good baseball teams have is the one thing all good football teams have --

Good players.

role players.

Oh. Fuck. I thought you were going to say good players.

Guys who don't need the credit and who don't earn the big money.

People don't realize this, but usually when a team loses, the number one culprit is credit hogs. Credit hogs are polluting our sports teams and they must be stopped. Credit hogs are the poison, and there's only one antidote. His name?

In baseball, David Eckstein is a winning player, much the same as Mike Vrabel is.

I've heard this so many times it must be true. I must be wrong. I give up.

Labels: ,

posted by Junior  # 5:18 PM
As of the beginning of the second quarter, King's recommendation that the Yankees learn how to win from the Bears is looking very, very bad.
Now, however: genius.
Post a Comment

<< Home

Happy Birthday, Tim McCarver!

Let's all relive one of my favorite McCarver moments, the Mark Wohlberg incident.

Hey, it made it onto McCarver's Wikipedia page (see the Verbal Gaffes section (which, in my opinion, should probably encompass the entire page)).


posted by Junior  # 5:14 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

Saturday, October 14, 2006


Simmons Drops Some Serious Hindpsychology

You know how after almost any team loses in any sport, someone says in a really annoying voice, "Well, they just didn't want it enough!" Bill Simmons is doing that, but taking it to a whole new level. He's now implying that by overrating a team, the media can trick them into not wanting it enough. Seriously.

Read what he wrote below, and think about how when taken as a whole, everything seems to flow together and make sense.

What happens when a team doesn't have anything to prove?

Look at the Yankees. Everyone handed the World Series to them before the playoffs started, to the point it became a no-win situation, no different from any of the Team USA basketball collapses the past few years. The Yankees were a peculiar mix of All-Stars, washed-up veterans and nobodies who weren't as collectively good as we thought, a team with some fundamental flaws (defense, chemistry and pitching), a team that easily could be taken down by some live bats and a couple of good arms. As soon as they started struggling, they self-imploded and that was that. Everyone was shocked.

But was it really that shocking?

Sounds pretty good. But wait until I take it line by line and nitpick it to death. This will be enjoyable to at least one person. Probably KT.

What happens when a team doesn't have anything to prove?

The Yankees hadn't won a World Series in five years and they're expected to win every year by a crazy boss. They had a lot to prove. Not to mention that the bulk of the team is made up of non-True-Yankee losers whom everyone wants to crucify. Don't you think it would've helped Gary Sheffield or Jason Giambi out reputation-wise to win a championship in New York? How about, um, Alex Rodriguez? I'm pretty sure he had something to prove.

Look at the Yankees. Everyone handed the World Series to them before the playoffs started,

Everyone. Actually, if you follow that link, you'll find that six out of nineteen ESPN experts picked the Yankees to win the Series. Seven picked the Twins. Humorously, only one picked a team that is not already eliminated.

to the point it became a no-win situation,

I think if the Yankees had won the World Series, that would have counted as a "win." They lost, so it was "not a win." I'm being over-literal, but come on. It would have been awesome for those guys to win and prove they were "championship material" guys who don't "choke" and instead "do all the little things" or "whatever it takes" to "get the job done." Being the favorite, which they very marginally were, I think, despite how the ESPN folks voted, does not make your situation a "no-win" one.

no different from any of the Team USA basketball collapses the past few years.

A lot of people were picking Argentina and Spain last time.'s Chris Sheridan would not shut up about it.

The Yankees were a peculiar mix of All-Stars, washed-up veterans and nobodies

I think a lot of teams are a mix of All-Stars, washed-up veterans and nobodies -- not sure it's that peculiar. I guess the implication here is that they needed more hungry kids to hungrify them. Also, gritty veterans instead of washed-up veterans. And firebrands.

a team with some fundamental flaws (defense, chemistry and pitching),

I'm going to print these words in sizes of relative importance:

defense chemistry pitching

That totally wasn't worth it. Let's move on.

a team that easily could be taken down by some live bats and a couple of good arms.

Again, this is almost every team in baseball history with the possible exception of the '27 Yankees. "Live bats and a couple of good arms" are what make teams good. This is like saying "You know what the 2006 Yankees' kryptonite was? A good fucking team, that's what."

As soon as they started struggling, they self-imploded and that was that.

Uh huh. They self-imploded. They wanted to lose. They quit. Very plausible.

Everyone was shocked.

I was surprised. I thought the Yankees were slightly better. And I still think that if they played the Tigers 100 times, the Yankees would win like 52 of them. Not that interesting.

But was it really that shocking?

No, but not because of your elaborate media-jinxed-them theory. It's because in a five-game series, anything can fucking happen. I can't stress this enough. The Royals swept the Tigers. Is it because the Tigers had nothing to prove or because the media thought they had the best lineup of all time? No. It was because the Tigers had three shitty days in a row. In baseball, that happens.

This particular Yankee team didn't even seem to like one another


By Game 4, they clearly didn't want to be there anymore. You could see them checking out as the game went on.

What I saw was Jeremy Bonderman with filthy stuff and Jaret Wright with Jaret Wright stuff.

They had no fight in them.

Hindpsycho. This is baseball. The only semblance of "fight" I can think of is maybe taking more pitches than usual? Or what? I don't know, you tell me. Again, Bonderman was throwing darts. How do you fight that?

Did the gushing stream of "greatest lineup ever!" angles soften them in the end?

No, goddammit, it didn't soften them. Is anyone buying this?

Sure seemed like it -- they didn't seem to be like a team that was battling for anything.

Anger subsiding ... indignance waning ... resistance weakening. Jesus. Define battling. This is baseball. Fouling off pitches? Catching and throwing the ball with an angry, serious expression on your face? I bet they were trying to do those things.

As soon as the Tigers pulled a Buster Douglas in Game 2 and punched them in the chops, they were never the same.

You've silenced my arguments with that metaphor. Point, Simmons.

Torre panicked and started switching his lineup around.

This is a tangible fact (well, the switching part is, not the panicking part). I don't believe it was a very big factor at all.

The bats went silent. Guys started screwing up. A-Rod peed on himself against Zumaya. The Tigers smelled the kill and finished them off. And that was that.

Here is my alternative explanation. It doesn't have as much to do with guys' feelings and the media and Hideki Matsui thinking he has nothing to prove.

Game One: the Yankees throw a good pitcher. They win.

Game Two: the Yankees throw a good pitcher but they lose a close one.

Game Three: the Yankees throw Randy Johnson, a pitcher with a 5.00 ERA. Also, Kenny Rogers is genuinely good for a game. They lose.

Game Four: the Yankees throw Jaret Wright, a bad pitcher. They lose.

And that was that.

Labels: ,

posted by Junior  # 7:49 PM
On the larger issue of whether mercenary All-Star squads with no chemistry can ever win championships, thanks to everyone who's written in and suggested the recent successes of the Detroit Red Wings (2002) and Chelsea of the English Premier League.
Here's what I would like just one person to write:

In the regular season, the Tigers were 95-67. The Yankees were 97-65. Pick-'em.

The Yankees had a great line-up. The Tigers had a very good line-up. Ad: Yankees.

The Tigers had Verlander, Bonderman, Robertson, Zumaya, Rodney, Rogers, Grilli, and Jones. The Yankees had Mussina, Wang, Rivera, and nobody else. Unless you count RJ, who is 43 with a balky back and had a very mediocre year. Ad: Tigers.

The series is best-of-five, which when two teams have nearly identical winning percentages, is the equivalent of a coin-flip.

The Tigers won the series.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Post a Comment

<< Home

I Heard it on Fox, Part 2!

At the end of the day, their style of play: their lack of speed, their failure to play smallball -- the ability to play smallball -- another season, will that lack of execution or even having that in your hip pocket to pull out from time to time ... will it cost them in the postseason?

Guess which team he's talking about?

I'm going to lean toward the "it's not the lack of smallball, it's the fact that they got 2-hit in Game Three and allowed 5 and 8 runs in Games One and Two, respectively" camp.

Labels: ,

posted by Junior  # 7:26 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

They Fired Steve Lyons for That?

I heard this live on the air yesterday, but at the time, it didn't immediately make me think that Steve Lyons believes all Hispanic people are robbers. Or whatever people think he meant. Here's what happened:

In the second inning of Friday's game between Detroit and Oakland, Piniella talked about the success light-hitting A's infielder Marco Scutaro had in the first round of the playoffs. Piniella said that slugger Frank Thomas and Eric Chavez needed to contribute, comparing Scutaro's production to finding a "wallet on Friday" and hoping it happened again the next week.

Later, Piniella said the A's needed Thomas to get "en fuego" - hot in Spanish - because he was currently "frio" - or cold. After Brennaman praised Piniella for being bilingual, Lyons spoke up.

Lyons said that Piniella was "hablaing Espanol" - butchering the conjugation for the word "to speak" - and added, "I still can't find my wallet."

"I don't understand him, and I don't want to sit too close to him now," Lyons continued.

That's the official story, but I think this firing has a lot more to do with what happened between Steve and Lou at Outback after the game.


posted by Junior  # 6:47 PM
(He told him he hated dirty Mexicans.)
Also, he made some way better insensitive remarks two years ago about Shawn Green:

Two years ago, he was suspended without pay for making light of Shawn Green's decision, when he was with the Dodgers, not to play on Yom Kippur, the holiest day on the Jewish calendar.

"He's not a practicing Jew," Lyons said. "He didn't marry a Jewish girl." He added, "And from what I understand, he never had a bar mitzvah, which is unfortunate because he didn't get the money."

The money! Get it? Jewish person? Didn't get the money?
Just gonna cut and paste here.

Earlier in the playoffs, while working the Mets-Dodgers NLDS, Lyons unwittingly made fun of a nearly blind fan who was wearing special glasses to see the game.

"He's got a digital camera stuck to his face," Lyons said.

He also once pulled down his pants on the field during his playing days.

Post a Comment

<< Home


04.05   05.05   06.05   07.05   08.05   09.05   10.05   11.05   12.05   01.06   02.06   03.06   04.06   05.06   06.06   07.06   08.06   09.06   10.06   11.06   12.06   01.07   02.07   03.07   04.07   05.07   06.07   07.07   08.07   09.07   10.07   11.07   12.07   01.08   02.08   03.08   04.08   05.08   06.08   07.08   08.08   09.08   10.08   11.08  

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?