I'm happy Jim Rice got in, he deserves it, but in comparison to Andre Dawson I'm not sure how he got in first.  Two guys from roughly the same era and it doesn't appear close.  Maybe someone else has a perspective I'm not looking at, but its hard to think this is any more than Rice played where people saw him and for most of his career Dawson did not.

Dawson played 21 years, Rice played 15 years

Dawson 438 HR, Rice 382 HR

Dawson 503 doubles, Rice 373 doubles

Dawson 1591 RBI, Rice 1451 RBI

Dawson 314 SB, Rice 58 SB

I've heard talk of Rice being a more "feared" hitter in his time:

Dawson 143 IBB, Rice 77 IBB

Both had tremendous throwing arms:

Dawson 157 OF Assists, Rice 137 OF assists

Awards:

Dawson:
1977 Rookie of the Year
1987 MVP (Top 10 - 3 times)
8 Gold Gloves
4-time Silver Slugger
8-time All-Star

Rice:
1978 MVP (Top 10 - 5 times)
8-time All-Star
2-time Silver Slugger

I'm more optimistic than ever that Dawson will get in at some point now.

I don't get the whole 1-game playoff concept for baseball.  It has a longer regular season than any other sport why do you need an extra game to determine the division winner?  You play a 162-game schedule that is supposed to separate the best team in each division and then when you have a tie, you throw that entire 162 game season out the window and decide it on 1 lone game, with a homefield advantage decided by a coin flip.  Now the winner of that game has little if any rest and is the road team for the first two games.  Even worse, in a 3 way tie scenario, baseball would play multiple extra games.  Has any team ever won a 1 game playoff to get in and then won the WS?  I don't know. 

Basketball and football play much shorter regular seasons and have perfectly acceptable tiebreaking scenarios.  I don't understand why, when the Twins and White Sox end in a tie you don't award the Twins the Central title by virtue of their 10-8 regular edge head to head against the White Sox, or how about deciding by division record?  Whatever tiebreaker everyone is happy with use it, but an extra game doesn't make sense to me.

This is one of the best articles I've read in a long time.  Very good information.  Amazing to see how Maddux hasn't changed much since he was 19.

http://www.chrisoleary.com/projects/Baseball/Pitching/RethinkingPitching/Essays/ProperPitchingMechan ics_GregMaddux.html

I really like the break down of Maddux elbow position as well as the extreme percent stride length he achieved at release even back then.

"Since 1992, our group has been interested in studying the differences between the visual functions of professional baseball players and the general population. Since that time, we have tested approximately 1500 players from the Los Angeles Dodgers and New York Mets major and minor league systems. We tested each player with a series of visual function tests consisting of three main types: Visual Acuity (sharpness of vision), Stereo Acuity (depth perception) and Contrast Sensitivity (being able to pick a target out of a background)."

       " The results of visual acuity testing were most surprising. Certainly we felt that professional baseball players must have excellent visual acuity, but we were surprised to find that 81% of the players had acuities of 20/15 or better and about 2% had acuity of 20/9.2 (the best vision humanly possible is 20/8). The average visual acuity of professional baseball players is approximately 20/13!"

Dr. Daniel M. Laby, M.D.
Assistant Clinical Professor of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School

Dr. David G. Kirschen, Ph.D., OD
Chief of Binocular Vision and Orthoptic Services at the Jules Eye Institute,
UCLA School of Medicine

Tony Abbatine, National Director of Instruction, Frozen Ropes Training Centers

Like I've always said, major league ballplayers are freaks of nature.

I've tried several times to state my beliefs about the causes of arm injuries (particularly in cases like Liriano) and never felt like I was saying what I meant.  I found some interesting information that I think says things more clearly than I have been able to.  This from the James Andrews American Sports Medicine Institute:

"High-speed motion analysis of 72 healthy college and professional pitchers was used to investigate correlations between improper kinematics and increased elbow and shoulder joint kinetics."

"At the elbow, a significant correlation was seen between increased medial force exerted onto the forearm and two kinematic parameters: increased shoulder external rotation at the instant of foot contact, and increased horizontal adduction. "

Early external shoulder rotation and increased movement of the elbow from the center of gravity, so to speak, lead to increased medial (UCL) force exerted on the elbow.

Got a chance to catch the O-Royals vs. Oklahoma tonight.  Some observations:

Elarton is a meatball, but nothing new there.

Jason Botts is a large human.  Looks like a big leaguer.  Absolute lazer homer in the first.  Its hard to believe looking at him tonight that he couldn't be successful in the bigs.

Angel Berroa looks done.  Looked completely disinterested all night, but then I guess that's his thing.  Still managed a couple hits.

Nelson Cruz is another large human.  Homered to center on a night when the wind was a non-factor and Rosenblatt actually plays pretty big.  It was off Elarton but still an impressive shot.  Roped a ball to deep right center of a lefty with good movement away (name escapes me) later in the game.

Lubanski looked a bit sloppy at the plate and surprisingly overmatched.  He's obviously still young but he needs to refine his game alot IMO, at the plate.

I am amazed the Rangers don't have Freddy Guzman bunting every time.  The Royals were playing Wathan in short left.

Nate Gold looks the part of classic overachiever/AAAA player.  Still a guy that puts up numbers like he does deserves a shot, ala Chris Shelton.

I kept missing Brazell and Maier's AB's with the kids acting up.

He's done.

I've been worried but not overly up until this point.  But now I am certain he's either hurting or completely destroyed from the workloads.  The power sinker that got him the majors and made him so successful is non-existent.  His fastball is straighter than Russ Ortiz'.  

Yes Dusty, it took a little longer, but finally, all 3 of the studs from the 2003 Cubs are done.  Have a toothpick and celebrate.

Anyone know the latest on this guy?  Is he going to sign? What is Boras asking for? Anyone know what the results were from Yocum's examination?

I saw this kid pitch at Missouri and I thought he had some of the best stuff I've ever seen at the college level.  Big strong kid, mid 90's heat, hard sharp slider.  Looked like he had recovered from arm woes in the early spring.

The Cubs signed Mark DeRosa to a 3 year deal.  Yeah baby!

The problems with the Cubs weren't the starting pitching, what were us Cubs fans thinking? no no no, what we needed was another platoon player signed to a 3 year deal.  Now we have Jones for 2 more years who can't hit lefties and Derosa for 3 who can't hit righties.

Hendry's big plan for ending the 100 years of misery is clear now.  Have completely different lineups vs. righties and lefties.  Wait, you are allowed a 40 man roster right?

The only exciting part of the upcoming season will be to watch Sweet Lou blow his stack as the Cubs lose 90 games again.

John, I'm wondering if you can comment a little bit on Hill.  A little while back in your Q&A session your response on him was something to the effect that he needs to get into a different organization.  I didn't ask then but I was wondering if you meant he needed a change of scenery to refresh his outlook or you were worried about how the Cubs treat pitchers.

Since that Q&A session (like it had something to do with it), Hill has been on a tear and has been on the verge of dominant.  In 8 of his last 9 starts he's allowed 2 earned runs or less.  The only outing he allowed more than 2 earend was in Colorado.  During that stretch his line looks like this:

55.2 IP, 42 hits, 16 ER, 16 BB, 51 K (2.58 ERA)

I do worry about Dusty overworking pitchers, Hill threw 120 last night, but I am also not nearly as worried about Hill increasing his workload being 26 instead of say 21.  His numbers over the last couple months are starting to resemble what he was doing in AAA.  He has really resembled early Zito over this stretch with a fastball around 90 and a devastating breaking ball.

Bobby Cox had a glowing review of Hill last night:

"He's tough," Atlanta manager Bobby Cox said of Hill. "He's going to be a real good one. He's a good guy to have in your rotation, that's for sure."

I'm asking specifically if you think this is his peak and can he maintain it?  Can he go even a step further to the level of dominance he showed at AAA?  Is this just a good stretch of work and he'll fall back to a #3-4 starter type?