SB Nation User Blog: taco pal

Second off-day in jeopardy

taco pal — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 16:32:34 -0000

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs2008/news/story?id=3658645

So there's rain in the forecast for Saturday night. Major League Baseball, in its infinite wisdom, has announced that if there's a rainout that day, all three games in Philadelphia will be pushed back a day but Games 6 and 7 will not be pushed back. The teams will instead just lose their off-day on Tuesday.

Which means that there would be games on five consecutive days. The available starters for Game 7 would then be J.A. Happ and Short Rest Moyer for the Phillies, Edwin Jackson and Short Rest Garza for the Rays.

This strikes me as bad news.

Deep Thoughts, With Eduardo Perez

taco pal — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 15:09:23 -0000

Promoted from the FanPosts. Frankly I relish being the "underdog" here (as much as a 92 win team can be an underdog to an 84 game winner). -- WholeCamels

So did anyone else get a chance to hear Eduardo Perez of ESPN Baseball Tonight share his brilliant insights on why the Dodgers are sure to beat our Phils in this upcoming series? If not, here's a brief transcript.

RAVECH: Is this gonna be a long one? Should it be a long one if it's played by both teams to their abilities?

PEREZ: I think it's gonna be a six-game series. You look at what the Dodgers have - they have an identity now. They can go into a series now and know exactly what their lineup's gonna be. They don't have to be going into the clubhouse looking at that lineup card: "Am I playing or am I not?" That's something the Phillies are still trying to figure out. Pedro Feliz doesn't know if he's gonna be in there on a daily basis. We saw Burrell at the end - at the last game of the series - they didn't know if he was going to be hitting fifth or sixth. The identity factor is gonna be key. Players know when they go to sleep that they're gonna be in there the next day.

I don't know about you but that sure has me convinced. All hope is lost!

FWIW, Krukker also chose the Dodgers, but said that if the Phillies bats start performing, then the series will go seven and be a toss-up. According to Kruk, the Phillies' offense isn't performing well enough now because all it's doing is hitting home runs. Over on TBS, Curtis Granderson thinks the Dodgers have a clear edge. Eckersley thought it was a close call but also went with the Dodgers. I think Ripken waffled but I don't have a clear recollection of what he said.

Everybody (Still) Hates Charlie

taco pal — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 19:35:50 -0000

Charlie's been getting a lot of love from the crowds at CBP of late, but I've got to tell you, both the radio shows and the blogs and bulletin boards in town have just been all over him for replacing Hamels with Lidge for the ninth yesterday.

Frankly, I wanted Charlie to keep Hamels in yesterday. But Charlie's decision wasn't unreasonable and the level of outrage around town is just totally absurd.

1. The Phillies won the game!

2. A common argument being made is that Lidge shouldn't have pitched because he's been struggling lately, while Hamels was cruising. To that I would say: If you're not going to use Lidge in a game where you have a three-run lead, when are you ever going to use him? Isn't that the ideal situation for using a struggling closer? Should we only bring him in when we have a six-run lead, Clay Condrey-style?

3. Another common argument is that we shouldn't have used Lidge because he won't be effective for tonight's game when we might really need him. This, of course, contradicts the argument in #2 above. If you don't trust Lidge to be effective, how does it help matters to save him for a game when you have an even greater need for him to be effective?

4. No one should ever complain about Hamels getting extra rest that doesn't cost the Phils a win. This is irrespective of whether his next start is in Game 4, Game 5, or in the NLCS. Hamels has pitched a lot of innings and needs as must rest as possible. He was worn down toward the end of the regular season even without ever pitching on short rest.

More on Lenny Dykstra

taco pal — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:16:55 -0000

The Lenny Dykstra p.r. machine is in full force! An article in The New Yorker! Who would have ever thought?

Seriously, it's a really great read. Couple of Phillies-related excerpts below:

As proof of the worthiness of his cause, he brought up his old Phillies teammate Pete Incaviglia: "Remember the big, burly guy? Best five-o'clock hitter in baseball history. Allergic to leather. Allergic to leather." (Translation: Incaviglia could hit the ball a mile in batting practice, and was no good with a glove.) "Inky called me this winter, and he asked me for a job. And I felt bad--said, `Come on down.' I showed him our business plan, and he said, `Where was that when I was playing?' " (Incaviglia, who now manages a minor-league team in Texas, later told me, "Lenny's idea is the most brilliant, best idea I've ever heard in my life. It's mind-boggling.")

and

"My approach in investing is much the same as my approach to hitting," he wrote. "I would rather take a walk or single and reach first than shoot for a home run and strike out swinging." According to The Street's "Stat Book Scorecard," Dykstra's picks earned $183,650 on a hundred and three trades in an eight-month period last year. "He had an Amgen trade," Cramer said, referring to the biotech company. "It was like hitting the ball between the shortstop and the third baseman in a way that made me feel proud." He went on, "I have yet to meet anyone other than Lenny from the world of sports who was able to make the transfer so that they have something to say that has value added. Many sports figures have been successful salesmen, but I would most likely have hired Lenny at my hedge fund, back when I was doing that." Dykstra is now working on a book about investing, with the literary agent David Vigliano, whom he calls "the No. 1 book agent in the country."
Reminders that Dykstra could be passing his time less constructively are not hard to come by. The day after my house tour, he got a rambling phone message from a former Phillies teammate, who was calling from the Borgata casino, in Atlantic City. Dykstra repeated the player's last name aloud and shook his head. Then he told Terri about it. She looked distressed but not surprised. "How'd he get your number?" she asked.

And now for some good news...

taco pal — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:38:27 -0000

Teams that wear red are more likely to dominate in competitive sports.

Analysis of English league results since the Second World War shows that teams whose strips are predominantly red win more often, get more points per game and finish higher in the league on average compared with those who wear other colours.
Scientists believe the colour can confer an advantage in competitive sports because opponents subconsciously associate it with aggression and dominance, and as a result act in a more defensive manner when confronted with it.

Hey, you can't argue with science.

I don't know why this hasn't worked for us in the first 125 years of Phillies history, but I'm sure it'll start kicking in any second.

Lenny Dykstra: Stock Market Whiz

taco pal — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:05:35 -0000

Did anyone happen to catch the segment on Lenny Dykstra last night on Real Sports With Bryant Gumbel? It was about how Lenny has become a renowned expert on finance and investing, and has turned himself from a mere millionaire into a multi-multi-millionaire.

I've known for a while that Dykstra was into investing because of his column on TheStreet.com, but I'd always thought that was a pure gimmick since JBL also has a column on the same site and I assumed they couldn't both be financial whizzes. But maybe that was wrong. Jim Cramer said on the show that there are only three or four people in the world whose stock picks always get his attention, and that Dykstra is one of them. Cramer isn't exactly unbiased since he owns TheStreet.com, but still. I guess I just don't know what to believe anymore.

On camera, though, Dykstra comes off as being as much of a dumb jock as he ever was. He slurs his speech like an ex-boxer and curses constantly. He's put on tons of weight and now bears an amazing resemblance to Biff in Back to the Future II.

In other news, Dykstra said on camera that he had never used steroids. Then, off camera (but not off the record) a few minutes later, he told the correspondent that he had just lied.

Hamels controversy?

taco pal — Tue, 18 Sep 2007 19:21:30 -0000

Did anyone know there was a tempest in a teapot recently regarding comments Cole Hamels made to the media? Apparently, Hamels said to some reporter at some point that if the Phillies were no longer in the race when he recovered from his elbow soreness, he wanted to just shut it down and come back next spring. (This is all moot today, of course.)

Now, since I get all my Phillies news from this website and philly.com, I didn't even know that Hamels had made these comments. But I was talking to a WIP-listening friend over the weekend, and he was totally incensed about it. I also heard Mitch Williams bring it up last night on the Comcast postgame show.

It seems that the WIP folk may have been beating the drums about this comment for several days, and how it showed a lack of heart, lack of loyalty, lack of guts, and so on and so forth. To me, the comment sounds perfectly reasonable, but hey, it's not like "reason" is really all that relevant here. Philly has a long history of turning on its stars. Hopefully, this isn't the beginning of history repeating itself.

Next Year

taco pal — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:13:28 -0000

No, I haven't thrown in the towel yet, but I've gone into my wind-up.

Anyway, here are what I see as the main questions that team management will be faced with this offseason. Let me know if I forgot anything.

1. Do you re-sign Rowand?

I wouldn't. I think there's a good chance he's just having a contract year this year. Even if that isn't the case, I can't see him improving on this season - yet he's going to command a salary based on this season's performance. The goal is to buy low, sell high, not the other way around, and however much money Rowand's going to command on the market can be better used elsewhere. See #5 below for more.

2. Do you extend Howard?

Yes.

3. What do you do about Burrell?

I would extend him if you can get him at a reasonable price (i.e. a price lower than what he's making this year). He's actually earning his pay this year, or coming close at least. I don't think we can count on that going forward. Still, I think there's a good chance he'll sign for a reasonable price. He likes Philadelphia (who knows why, considering how he's been treated here), and he might give us a hometown discount.

4. What do you do with Myers?

I'd prefer to move him back to the rotation. But our final decision on this can be deferred until the beginning of spring training.

5. Do we re-sign anyone else?

I'd go after Werth. If Rowand leaves, Victorino + Bourn + part-time Dobbs isn't enough for CF and RF. But Victorino + Bourn + Werth + part-time Dobbs might not be so bad. Preferably, we'd re-sign Werth and pick up another decent part-timer in case Werth gets hurt again. Someone in the David Dellucci mold. Possibly Geoff Jenkins, who's a free agent (although someone out there might give Jenkins starter money).

6. Any trade possibilities?

I don't see a lot of options here. We don't really have any areas of strength to deal from. ("Lineup" is not an area of strength for trading purposes, unless you have two good hitters who play the same position. Weakening your lineup to help your pitching staff is just robbing Peter to pay Paul. We do not have more than one good player at any one position.) I'm not comfortable trading prospects right now. Our minor league system is on the rebound to some degree, but I don't think it's strong enough to raid.

7. What's our rotation going to look like next year? What free agents should we pursue?

Sadly, I think the rotation's going to be lousy again. Hamels is a stud, but he has an injury history, and you can never really count on young pitchers to stay healthy even if they don't have injury histories. Kendrick might be a flash in the pan. And those are our two strengths.

I think if we had two studs in the rotation, everything else would work itself out. We could play mix-and-match with the last three slots, and we'd be able to hold our own with our lineup. Heck, even Adam Eaton has been able to win half his starts this year, and he's the worst pitcher in the whole league. (And while acquiring Eaton was a mistake from the get-go, he's not this bad - he's just not. I've got to imagine there'll be some regression to the mean next year.) If we could count on a .750 winning percentage in 40% of the games, that would put us right on course for the postseason.

But there are no studs out there. Bartolo Colon? Curt Schilling? Jeff Weaver? Roger Clemens? Bleah.

This is why I think it would be best to move Myers back to the rotation. Myers is at least a potential stud, and we might be able to pick up a replacement closer. Francisco Cordero and Eric Gagne are flawed closers, but they'd be more acceptable as closers than Jeff Weaver would be a starter. Carlos Silva might be a decent pickup as a starter given his age and groundball ratio, but he's no stud.

So that's it. Any thoughts?

Another example of bad journalism

taco pal — Mon, 20 Aug 2007 17:10:44 -0000

This Saturday, I tuned into WIP for the first time in forever. I had the privilege of catching Sports Radio's Most Incompetent Idiot, Rob Charry, sneering at Charlie Manuel on the ground that Charlie hasn't been allowing Cole Hamels to pitch enough innings. (Yes, you heard right.)

Now, I wouldn't expect your typical backup weekend monkey like Charry to know anything about the extensive research that's been conducted into the danger of high pitch counts for young pitchers, etc. What was truly frustrating was that Charry based his whole argument on the premise that at least "four or five times" Charlie had cost the team a win by pulling Hamels out of the game when he clearly still had gas in the tank, only to see the bullpen immediately blow the lead.

Thanks to the magic of the internet (which I know they have in the WIP studio) anyone can look at Hamels' game log and see that that premise was just false. Hamels has gotten a no-decision in a loss only three times all year. In one of those games (8/4 vs MIL), he had given up 4 runs, including a 3-run inning his last time through the heart of the order - clearly no gas left in the tank that day. In another game (4/4 vs. ATL), the bullpen didn't blow the lead until the 9th, two innings after Hamels left the game, and Hamels had already thrown 110 pitches - again, Charlie can't be faulted for that one. There's only one solitary game where the argument is plausible - 4/9 vs. NYM.

Basically, what happened is that Hamels was arguably taken out too soon in his second start of the year, and since it was so early in the season it imprinted itself on Charry's mind. So now, even though that was the only time it's happened all year long, Charry has this vague impression that it happens all the time. And he didn't bother to look it up before spreading this false fact around on the air. What a journalist.

It's incredibly annoying that nitwits like Charry can go and basically spread lies all around the entire Delaware Valley just because they're too lazy to take thirty seconds to fact-check themselves on Yahoo Sports. Charry just knows in his gut that Charlie's messed up with Hamels, and when you feel something in your gut, what do you need to look things up for? I'm not saying Charlie's beyond any form of criticism, but please, I mean, you're supposed to be a journalist of some sort. Can't you at least get your facts right? The opinion leaders in the Philadelphia sports world simply have no concern for truth or reason. Morons, morons everywhere.

Props to the Fat Men

taco pal — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:43:47 -0000

It's about time somebody gave some credit to the two Dominican fat guys on our pitching staff: Antonio Alfonseca and Jose Mesa. Both of them have consistently done a creditable (and sometimes superb) job for the Phillies out of the pen this year: 3.86 for Alfonseca in 46 games for Alfonseca, 2.52 (!) for Mesa in 24 games. And yet as recently as a week ago, there were people calling for Mesa to be released outright to make room for Kyle Lohse.

This just goes to show you: past performance, strikeout/walk ratio, career trendlines, and all the rest of it are the best long-term predictors of future performance that we have at our disposal. But sometimes in baseball, in the short term, weird stuff just happens. Sometimes guys -- especially relief pitchers -- find a way to gut out unexplainably good performances for a season or a half a season, even though they can't strike anyone out and their careers have been on the downswing for years.

Does this mean I think we should bring Mesa back for next season? Not a chance. (I'm ambivalent on Alfonseca.) But as long as he's got the hot hand right now, I have no problem with continuing to give him the ball. It's not like we're paying him anything. And both he and El Pulpo should get some applause for bailing us out in a big way this year.