So, I'm not really one to go on a tear around here, and as you can see if you so choose, my commenting is inversely related to the amount of schoolwork I'm assigned and I hardly ever put up a fanpost. Unfortunately, when I read THIS article, I got pretty chapped. 

A quote from that article:  "By request of Commissioner Bud Selig [...] all big league players and uniformed personnel have been asked to wear the late Hall of Famer's famous No. 42 on the field when the 30 teams celebrate the occasion."

First of all, I have all the respect in the world for Jackie Robinson, and in no way am I biased towards or against any particular social, cultural or ethnic group.  A couple years back, on the 60th anniversary of Jackie Robinson's debut in the majors, I thought it was really neat when Griffey asked to wear 42, and that it was a meaningful and thoughtful tribute.  I was less enamored last season when entire teams took the field wearing 42 (Tampa? Seriously?).  This most recent permutation of Griffey's originally good idea has gone way, way too far. 

I've always been under the impression that when someone has their number retired, that number belongs to them, on that team.  So, when MLB retired his number throughout the sport in 1997, one could argue that it was a statement that 42 belongs to Robinson throughout the game.  Here's the point:  This was a man who, upon his trade to the Giants, retired.  Two days from now, the rival team that he hated so much will all be wearing his number, along with everyone else in baseball.

I think this is pretty tasteless.  It cheapens the retiring in the first place, which wasn't a bad idea initially. At this point, the widespread nature that this has become is a little bit of a disservice to Robinson, and it's all Selig's fault.  What a Jackass.

Barry Bonds:  "Hey Pedro, I've got 762 career Home runs.  That's like 639 more than you..."

Pedro Feliz:  "Yeah Barry - that's right, but I have a World Series Ring.  Wouldn't that be one more than you?" 

Bonds:  "I'm not retired."

Continue reading this post »

I realize this doesn't mean much, however, I present Barry Zito's combined 2008 MLB and Spring Training stats:

10 Starts (1-8 W-L), 44 IP, 57 Hits 37 Earned Runs, 25 BB, 14 SO, 7.57 ERA, 1.86 WHIP.

All that, AND an 83 mph fastball!  What a bargain for 19 million (I think, I can't remember exactly what his salary is, but I'm sure that's close).

The Giants would probably see a more positive effect on the team if he gave up the whole "Starting Pitcher" thing and threw BP, at least their offense would improve, and they'd actually get a shot to win on his days.  I'm not saying that he wasn't a good pitcher at some point during his career, but it looks like that at this point he's a grossly overpaid #5 starter.

Both ESPN and MLB.com have Lowry out until almost may with a wrist injury.  

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3280522

http://sanfrancisco.giants.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080306&content_id=2409476&vkey=spt 2008news&fext=.jsp&c_id=sf

I'm certainly not sounding any alarms, but it does weaken the pitching depth that the Giants have been letting everyone know about all winter.  I am a fan of Lowry, and think that he's a serviceable Major League Pitcher who's at best a #3 starter, and more realistically a #4.  Naturally, the caveat to that is only when he's cheap.  

I think he got really lucky to have an ERA under 4 last year with a 1.55 WHIP.  His walk rate and strikeout rates are both headed in bad directions.  It might have been prudent to move him during the offseason for some B level position player...

The good that will hopefully come of this is that the Giants will be smart enough to let Sanchez stay in the rotation for a month and not jerk the poor kid around anymore.  Correia is a nifty pitcher in his own right and Misch is a helluva competitor to succeed with the lack of stuff that he has, but Sanchez's ceiling is way higher, and it's time for him to get his shot; he's gonna be 25 this year.  

I was thinking the other night about the various fates of A-Rod, Nomar and Jeter.  Baseball Prospectus called them the "Holy Trinity" for a while, plus Tejada who was like #3a (I don't know if they still do; I'll pay for the book but not the site).  At the time, I think the consensus was that Jeter would have been the first one to move away from the position, with Nomar and A-Rod surviving longer because of their arm strength, despite Jeter's athleticism.  

So, if someone would have told me between the 2000 and 2002 seasons that by now, Jeter would be the only member left playing Short, I would have told them they were full of crap.  

(Not including Tejada for the sake of argument, and the fact that the was a later bloomer)

Then again, I probably would have said the same thing if that person told me that the Red Sox would have won two World Series in four years, and that my Giants were five outs away from doing it and lost it.

Anyhow, I know it's a random thought, but I got a kick out of thinking about it...

Cheers.