SB Nation User Blog: LA Seitz

Frankie and Dominance

LA Seitz — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 03:23:33 -0000

This is cross posted at my site, but I figured there's more discussion here, so I'm cross posting.

My last two posts (regarding the impact of the Teixeira trade) have prompted comments regarding the potential (probable?) departure of Frankie Rodriguez following this season. MSS thinks his leaving will be good for the Angels, as he is apparently no longer the "great reliever he once was". Meanwhile Anonymous thinks we won't miss his antics after all of those saves "he almost blows".

So for MSS, is a 26 year old closer with almost 200 career saves who, by the way, just learned a new pitch no longer dominant, even while still saving well over 90% of his chances? He just dropped his ERA to 2.42, saving a 1-0 game, while retiring the games best player, and one of the AL's best hitters in the process. He made A-Rod look stupid on a 3-2 change up, a pitch he didn't even know how to throw before this season. Does anyone doubt that in a year or two, he'll probably also add a splitter to he repertoire? He is not only still dominating, he's learning while doing it. Oh, and for good measure, one of the guys you'd probably list as dominant, Mariano Rivera, he couldn't get it done tonight. Big L next to his name in the box score.

And Anonymous, does this count as one of the saves he "almost" blew? I mean, he did throw three balls to A-Rod before making him look stupid in the process. And those two fly balls he gave up were only about 70 feet from going out. Yes occasionally Frankie makes things more interesting than we'd like. What closer doesn't? Troy Percival, God love him (heck, I sponsor his B-R page) wasn't always without drama. Bryan Harvey seemed like he always walked the bases loaded before striking out the side. But I think there's a tendency to remember the drama, and unfortunately the failures, more than the successes.

You can count on one hand the guys who have been dominant over Frankie's tenure in his role. Rivera, maybe Wagner, Nathan, and who else? Frankie has been part of that group for four years now, and he's much younger than all of them. Though his save totals have been high, his work rate hasn't been outrageous. You have to ask yourself, why are there so few guys on that list? It's because it's not easy to perform at that level year in year out. That's why guys like Derek Turnbow and Joe Borowski can look great one year, and get cut the next. There are very few closers with long track records of sustained success. And of those three mentioned above, Wagner's got an ERA over 8.00 in the post-season.

So you can cheer the departure of Frankie all you want, but it will, without a doubt, weaken the Angels. They will be worse without him.

I've said this so many times I may as well get it tattooed on my forehead, but here it is again, in boldface. The comparison is not between what Frankie is and what Frankie could be, or was for one great season, or what you wish he would be. The comparison is between what Frankie is and what currently exists in the game. Regardless of the fact that he no longer mows through three innings in 25 pitches with six strikeouts, like he did in 2002, he's still at the top of an elite group of players who, night in and night out, answer the bell in the last inning and deliver their team to victory. If you can't see that, then I guess I can't help you. But facts are facts, and the fact is Frankie is one of a select few that turns the vast majority of games he enters into eight inning affairs. And yes, that's a very, very valuable commodity. The Angels will regret the day he signs with someone else.

Bru-103: Men win Golf Championship - Chappell wins individual

LA Seitz — Sat, 31 May 2008 22:48:10 -0000

Bumped. Congrats to our boys for bringing home Bru-103. Click on the graphic for official recap. GO BRUINS. -N

Amazing finish. UCLA led Stanford by three with Erik Flores on 18 and Kevin Chappell on 17. Flores bogeyed 18. Chappell dunked it in the water on 17. He dropped, hit his next shot into the rough, which is about four inches deep where he hit it (more on that below). Chappell stepped up and holed his chip for bogey. They took a one shot lead to 18 where Chappell smoked his drive down the middle, knocked his second shot on the green, and two putted for the team and individual championship.

The 17th hole is a par three, and it looked like they were playing from the back tee, which puts it around 220. Water all down the right hand side, Pete Dye railroad ties and the whole bit. It's a really tough hole, but it looked downwind today. The wind usually blows the other direction. He need a par on 18 to win, and 18 is about a 470 yard par four. Again, it's manageable when it's downwind, and impossible when it's into the wind. Walking away with par there is quite a feat, especially with two championships on the line.

Full disclosure, I'm about a four handicap, and I play all over the Chicago area (my avatar is tee shot on #13 at Cog Hill). I get down to West Lafayette to play the Purdue course about twice every summer. I played there two weeks ago right before they closed the course to prepare it for the tournament, and they were promoting it as a chance to play it under the conditions they have at the NCAAs (in retrospect, it may have actually been a warning). The rough was practically unplayable. The first cut was over three inches, and a few yards in, it was about seven inches. Just brutal. It already has a course rating of over 76 from the tips (7,450 yards), and it was probably playing 2.5 strokes above that with this rough. On the first day, the second player of the day to tee off hit his ball five yards into the rough. Three players, and two spotters (who are out there to do nothing other than find balls in the rough) couldn't find his ball, and he had to re-tee with a two stroke penalty. I hit one in that rough two weeks ago, lost it, dropped, hit that ball about 30 feet, and almost lost that one too. It's that deep and thick. There are five par fours over 470. Under those conditions, it's probably the toughest course I've ever played. For Chappell to play it two under for the week is awesome.

Trent Johnson to LSU

LA Seitz — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 17:20:25 -0000

Mike Montgomery signed the deal with Berkeley too soon. Trent Johnson is leaving Stanford and taking the LSU job.

Stanford coach Trent Johnson has a verbal agreement to become the first-ever African American men's basketball coach at LSU.

Sources have told FOXSports.com a news conference is expected on Thursday.

Johnson, who led the Cardinal to the Sweet 16 this season, has agreed in principle to a deal that will take him to LSU, according to sources close to the situation.

Walker Stays at UCLA

LA Seitz — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 04:04:59 -0000

Bumped. -Menelaus

UCLA just put out a release stating that Walker is staying as defensive coordinator.

UCLA just released this - DeWayne Walker is staying as UCLA's defensive coordinator.

UCLA head football coach Rick Neuheisel is announcing that DeWayne Walker has agreed to be a part of Coach Neuheisel's first UCLA staff as defensive coordinator.

In addition, defensive line coach Todd Howard and linebackers coach Chuck Bullough will continue in their current positions.

Other staff decisions have yet to be made.

Linebackers coach Chuck Bullough is also staying, so I'm not quite sure what this means, if anything, for Norton.

Personally, I stand by what I said before. If Walker has agreed to work under Neuheisel and isn't going to rock the boat, then this is good news. First and foremost, the whole staff has to be on the same page. And if this is an indication that these two are on the same page, then this is an excellent development. Either way, the "I hate Walker" contingent, and the "I wanna have Walker's babies" contingent will need to learn to live with one another for a while.

Quick Thoughts on Today's Game

LA Seitz — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 23:27:58 -0000

Thought I'd get some thoughts down on this one before I get too drunk to remember what happened:

* UCLA won this game despite both the coaching staff and the officiating. Every decision Karl Dorrell makes is the wrong decision. He's simply in over his head as a game coach. How on earth do you burn a timeout to set up a fourth and one play, then run the crappy "try to draw them off" BS that they ended up running? The man is not a good head coach, and he should have been fired right after that play.
* The officials were awful. First they needed 10 minutes to review a play that never should have been reviewed in the first place. They called UCLA for an offensive pass interference call that even the guys in the truck couldn't find on a replay. They handed Berkeley a touchdown on a play where Desean Jackson never actually caught the ball. And somehow six referees didn't see a trip in full speed that a million viewers did. It was the most obvious trip call I've ever seen. It cost UCLA a first down, possibly a touchdown, and almost the game.
* The run defense was awesome. They dominated Justin Forsett for the majority of the game, and Berkeley really only ran the ball well out of the shutgun. The run defense was one of the major difference makers today.
* There's something about Pat Cowan that just makes the team play better. I can't explain it. Apparently it doesn't come through in practice. It may have nothing to do with his physical ability, but there's something about the way the team plays when he's in the game that works better than when Ben Olson is in the game. I really like Ben Olson, and I was jazzed when he committed to UCLA, but the team simply moves the ball better with Cowan. And it's probably just coincidence, but the defense seems to have played better when Cowan's been in there as well.
* Berkeley is a very good team, but they run a pro-style offense, which the Bruins can handle. It's the tricky stuff that gets them, and today, the defense won the game. Although the turnover battle was relatively even, Berkeley's were bigger, and obviously the ATV interception return at the end was the difference. The Horton pick was nice, but unnecessary.
* I don't have the numbers in front of me, but it seems that one big difference today from what we've seen lately were negative plays, or a lack thereof. Cowan excelled today in two key areas: he didn't turn the ball over with ill-advised throws, or tipped passes that become picks, and at worst, he got the ball back to the line of scrimmage. It's a little thing, often overlooked, but there's a big difference between 2nd and 10 and 2nd and 15, especially with their limitations when it comes to gaining yards in chunks. Cowan gets the ball back the line of scrimmage, and that makes a big difference.
* Like or not, the Bruins are 4-0 in conference, though they close with their three toughest games. I'd love for them to win the Pac 10 and go to the Rose Bowl, but it probably means Dorrell will come back. I'm not sure how I feel about that. I mean, I want him gone, but I can't root for the Bruins to lose. Maybe they'll face the Illini, who will then kill UCLA and get Dorrell fired. That may be the best possible end to the season. I could live with that. Not I think Illinois will a) be in the Rose Bowl, or b) kill UCLA, but as an Illinois law alum, I could live with that outcome if it meant Dorrell got the boot.

The Playoff Mustache

LA Seitz — Tue, 25 Sep 2007 17:16:04 -0000

NFL Adam over the Hater Nation, long time Angels fan and Dodger not-liker, has come up with a novel way to show your support this post-season: The Playoff Mustache.

The whole notion of playoff beards have been played out. That is why all Angels fans are implored to start a new tradition of the playoff mustache. Of course, Dodgers fans will claim that we stole this idea from them because the majority of female Dodgers fans are already sporting mustaches, but we are talking about a playoff team here.

Adams wants everyone to embrace their inner Grich. Who's with him?

A history lesson

LA Seitz — Thu, 28 Jun 2007 09:04:25 -0000

Moved Over From The Diaries...

Just a quick lesson for the chicken littles in the game threads.

2005:
May 7-9: Three game losing streak against the crappy Tigers (2) and decent Indians (1).
July 7-10: Four game sweep at the hands of the crappy Mariners.
July 24-28: Four game losing streak, including a sweep by the below average Blue Jays.
August 25-30: Five game losing streak, including a sweep by Tampa Bay. Tampa. Freaking. Bay.
September 12-15: Four game losing streak, including a sweep by Seattle, and a loss to the Tigers.

2004:
April 18-20: Three game losing streak
May 24-28: Four game losing streak, including a sweep by the Blue Jays who were even crappier than they were in 2005.
June 4-9: Five game losing streak against mediocre Cleveland and crappy Milwaukee.
June 16-18: Three game losing streak against Pittsburgh and Houston.
June 29-July 1: Four game losing streak, Dodgers and Oakland.
July 18-21: Four game losing streak, Boston (1), Cleveland (2), and Texas (1).
September 21-24: Three game losing streak, Seattle and Oakland.

2002 - Not even counting the awful start:
June 15-19: Four game losing streak, St. Louis and Dodgers.
June 24-25: Three game losing streak, all Texas, two in one day.
July 13-15: Three game losing streak, two against Kansas City.
August 7-9: Three game losing streak, Chicago and Toronto.
September 21-25: Four game losing streak, Seattle and Texas.

Sometimes a team goes through a rough stretch. Even very good teams. It's not the end of the world.

A's DFA Milton Bradley

LA Seitz — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 17:51:55 -0000

Per MLB.com and they've got something up on Athletics Nation as well. Apparently he had a bit of a dust-up after the game last night.

Not sure if this is really going to affect the team on the field that much since he's been absent from so many games, but you have to think that this makes a lot more likely that they'll be active in the trade market. Don't be surprised to see Dunn end up in Oakland.

Have to say that I agree with Nico at AN. It's a head scratcher, but you have to give a GM like Beane the benefit of the doubt.

Weavers

LA Seitz — Mon, 14 May 2007 23:48:09 -0000

Jeff's career got off to a pretty impressive start (if you stop counting at 14). So did Jered's. Since Jered just finished up start #25, I figured that would be a good time to compare. Couple of caveats:

Jeff was a year younger when he made his debut.
Jeff's first 25 starts all came in the same season.
Jeff pitched for a really crappy team.

Let's get to the numbers:

Jeff: 25 starts, 8-10, 5.23 ERA, 144.2 IP, 101 K, 1.304 WHIP, 22 Homers
Jered: 25 starts, 13-5, 2.79 ERA, 155.1 IP, 135 K, 1.127 WHIP, 18 Homers

If we dig a little deeper, we find that Jeff was 6-3 with a 2.93 ERA after 14 starts. Jered was 9-2 with a 2.33 ERA. Both look pretty damn good. But one of the main cries of the skeptics has been "wait 'til the league sees Jered twice". Assuming that MLB teams actually have an advanced scouting budget, I'm guessing that most teams are prepared for Jered at this point. So let's see how each fared over his next 11 starts.

Jered: 66.1 IP, 3.26 ERA, 9 HR, 61 K
Jeff: 58.2 IP, 8.59 ERA, 16 HR, 40 K

So, how many starts until we stop hearing the "Jeff got off to a great start, too" argument? 30? 50? 100?

Does anyone out there still think Jered is destined to be another Jeff?

MLB on DirecTV

LA Seitz — Mon, 08 Jan 2007 22:50:04 -0000

According to Maury Brown, the business of baseball guy over at Baseball Prospectus, the Extra Innings package may be for DirecTV subscribers only:

John Orerand and Eric Fisher of the Sports Business Journal have reported that MLB is in advanced talks with DirecTV to make the satellite television company the exclusive provider of MLB Extra Innings. While Extra Innings was initially only offered on DirecTV in 1996, the package has been available on cable since 2001, and on Dish Network since 2004.

If that happens, there will probably be one fewer voice in the Halosphere next season. Apparently this may be the case for the NHL as well.

Most of you will probably be unaffected, as home telecasts won't change, but it sucks for us out of market folks. I could switch to DirecTV, I guess, but a) I'm lazy, and b) I don't like being held hostage by satellite providers.