So Jim Hendry made a mistake. Does he blame the fanbase for not helping him make the deal work? No, he works his @$$ off in the off-season---doing nothing else---until he rectifies the mistake. Has he hurt the Cubs somewhat this off-season by being so single minded? Perhaps. But has he earned the respect of Cubs fans and his ownership? You betcha.

The moral for GMDM? Be like JimH in relation to JoseG fiasco. - TL

Once again, Mellinger gets it right. The negative uproar is as unnecessary as the overpraising of some potentially great pick-up would be (e.g. pulling off a trade for, say, Geovany Soto, would've been). On traditionally built teams, a weak bat at catcher would be tolerated if the traditional power positions were producing. The problem is the traditional positions, to which Mellinger alludes. In his words: "The Royals have much bigger issues." - TL

Like everyone else I'm delighted by the hiring of Jaramillo, but this line caught my attention:

"I knew this team wasn't going to have a hitting coach at the end of the season, and that's why things worked out," Jaramillo said

That has the aura of tampering, to me. Have there been any other stories that have raised the tampering question? - TL

What the Angels do not do is walk very much. The addition of the former Yankee Bobby Abreu has made their lineup more patient, willing to take more pitches instead of looking to hack. But the Angels still drew fewer walks than the average team, while the Yankees led the majors in that category.

The Angels (.285) and the Yankees (.283) ranked first and second in the majors in batting average, meaning they tend to make contact. That helps the Angels use their speed and put the game in motion, taking chances on the bases.

It's too bad the Royals can't even fall back on the sometimes good excuse (used properly) that they make solid contact and don't strike out often. Then again, the Royals were 18th and the Angels 21st in offensive strikeouts (higher meaning worse, of course). But the Mets had the fewest at 928 and that didn't take them far. So *the answer* isn't walks. That leaves us with OBP. The Yanks came in at #1 (.362) and the Angels #3 (.350). KC? #27 at .318. So walks aren't everything, but.... - TL

This is a first-rate Posnanski post. Here was my comment:

"I’ve been a baseball fan for a l-o-n-g time. I’ve given a lot of thought to the question: "What makes a winner?" There’s no one answer to that question. But of course I’ve known for a long time that HRs and RBIs, even for a great many players on one team during the same season, won’t make a winning team. All you have to do is look at decade’s worth of those Rangers clubs, and even the Tigers during the late 80s and early 90s, to know those stats alone won’t make a winning team. As a KC fan you need look no further than the 2000 team.

But, related to this post and the interview, I’ve never heard anyone articulate as well as Epstein the larger picture behind looking at OBP. Of course I reviled Dusty Baker’s ignorant "base-clogging" line about walks, but I’ve never quite understood how prioritizing OBP, plus OPS (despite the comment from Ryan above) as an organizational philosophy works toward a winning team until I saw the phrase: "not make outs."

What an excellent, succinct, and powerful way of phrasing the goal. Those three words cover a large range of productive baseball activities both inside and outside the batter’s box: HBP, walk, hits (of course), stealing bases well, running well, not getting picked off, and perhaps sacrifice bunts and flys (which are a borderline activity per Epstein’s interview–get out, but maintain high OBP).

Thanks for forwarding this, Joe. This interview should make an appearance at every non-Boston baseball website within the next week. – TL"

This is a first-rate Posnanski post. Here was my comment:

"I’ve been a baseball fan for a l-o-n-g time. I’ve given a lot of thought to the question: "What makes a winner?" There’s no one answer to that question. But of course I’ve known for a long time that HRs and RBIs, even for a great many players on one team during the same season, won’t make a winning team. All you have to do is look at decade’s worth of those Rangers clubs, and even the Tigers during the late 80s and early 90s, to know those stats alone won’t make a winning team. As a KC fan you need look no further than the 2000 team.

But, related to this post and the interview, I’ve never heard anyone articulate as well as Epstein the larger picture behind looking at OBP. Of course I reviled Dusty Baker’s ignorant "base-clogging" line about walks, but I’ve never quite understood how prioritizing OBP, plus OPS (despite the comment from Ryan above) as an organizational philosophy works toward a winning team until I saw the phrase: "not make outs."

What an excellent, succinct, and powerful way of phrasing the goal. Those three words cover a large range of productive baseball activities both inside and outside the batter’s box: HBP, walk, hits (of course), stealing bases well, running well, not getting picked off, and perhaps sacrifice bunts and flys (which are a borderline activity per Epstein’s interview–get out, but maintain high OBP).

Thanks for forwarding this, Joe. This interview should make an appearance at every non-Boston baseball website within the next week. – TL"

I know this topic has been discussed here before, but the link above presents a potential swap from the Cubs perspective. I'm no Paul Sullivan fan (article's author), but I do see some sense in this. Bradley's a multi-dimensional player who could help KC. I'm sure this will strike some as a Guillen-esque deal. Bradley's way more talented than Guillen. Bradley has a greater career OBP, hits for a higher average, and plays above average defense in right. He might even be less hot-headed than Guillen, believe it or not. ...So long as Bradley avoids our radio and tv announcers, everything could go smoothly. ;) My concern is this: Who do we give up? - TL

I loved seeing this:

The Royals' Zack Greinke followed up a 15-strikeout start with a complete game one-hitter on Sunday. He is just the fourth pitcher to do that since 1900. The other three:

• Vida Blue -- July 9, 1971 (17 Ks) and July 16, 1971 (1-hitter, 9 Ks).

Whenever you're on a list with Vida Blue, Pedro, and Randy Johnson, something's going right.

I'm getting the feeling that "third-place Cy Young voting run" is underestimating things. - TL

I had heard this via a FB post from a Milw area friend this morning. The BrewCrew have an abundance of position players, and Bannister certainly has value after recovering this season from his horrific 08 campaign. Of course Milw was a rumored trade partner last year and the year before (e.g. Greinke for P. Fielder---aren't we glad that blew over). - TL

"Late in the game here," DeJesus said, "you can always feel that Red Sox aura. But once we got Soria in the game, we feel confident that he’s going to do the job. And he did the job as usual."

And this is why they're called stoppers and get paid the big bucks and are occasionally invaluable. - TL