The City That Hates Tom Gordon

Well, Opening Day is a wrap, and once again, the bullpen is responsible for the Phillies’ first loss of the season. You may recall Ryan Madson blowing last year’s opener by serving up a two-run home run to Edgar Renteria, then of the Atlanta Braves. Today’s culprit is Tom Gordon, responsible for all five runs the Washington Nationals scored in the top of the ninth inning.

A recap of the coup the Nationals staged against the ineffective right-hander and de facto closer:

  • Lastings Milledge legs out an infield single to shortstop.
  • Nick Johnson hits a one-out RBI double to deep center field and advances to third on the throw home.
  • Austin Kearns walks.
  • Johnson scores when Carlos Ruiz tries to catch him napping off of third base when Paul Lo Duca bluffs a squeeze bunt.
  • Lo Duca doubles to left-center, scoring Kearns.
  • Ronnie Belliard doubles to deep center, scoring Lo Duca.
  • Dmitri Young hits a two-out RBI double that bounces high off of the right field fence off of reliever Clay Condrey.


Starter Brett Myers wasn’t sharp, but nonetheless effective. He pitched five innings, allowed five hits, walked two, allowed four runs (three of which were earned), and only struck out two.

Ryan Madson relieved Myers in the sixth inning. With two outs, Nationals shortstop Cristian Guzman eked out an infield single to shortstop, and Lastings Milledge followed by jacking a two-run home run well over the left field fence.

The Phillies had opportunities but could only manage three runs in the first six innings. Chase Utley hit a sacrifice fly in the first, Pat Burrell hit an RBI single in the fourth, and Utley hit a solo homer to right field in the sixth.

The Phightin Phils did mount a comeback in the seventh. Jayson Werth led off with a walk. The gravy train appeared to be rolling when catcher Carlos Ruiz yanked an RBI double to left-center and reigning NL MVP Jimmy Rollins defended his honor by tying the game up with a two-run homer that just barely cleared the fence around the 380-foot sign, courtesy Nationals left-hander Ray King.

That was it though, as the Phils quickly went down 1-2-3 in both the bottom of the eighth and ninth innings.

Game graph courtesy FanGraphs.

Opening Day Preparation

The Washington Nationals are now in Philadelphia following an exciting Opening Day 3-2 win last night against the Atlanta Braves that saw third baseman Ryan Zimmerman christen new Nationals Stadium with a walk-off solo home run in the bottom of the ninth inning. Odalis Perez — who drew interest from a new teams including the Phillies — started for the Nats and was stunningly effective: 5 innings, four hits, one walk, and one run — a solo homer to Chipper Jones.

Lefty Matt Chico will start for the Nationals as Brett Myers takes the hill for the Phillies in the Citizens Bank Park season opener. Keep an eye on Nationals closer Chad Cordero. He was warming up to come in for the ninth inning to try and nail down a 2-1 lead, but he never came in, and was instead replaced by Jon Rauch, who blew the save. Cordero has right shoulder tendinitis and it may prevent him from appearing in any games against the Phillies.

Obviously, the Phillies’ 25-man roster is now set, and the only surprises should be Tim Lahey and Wes Helms. Lahey was just acquired and he has to stay on the 25-man roster or be offered back to the Cubs, as it goes with Rule-5 acquisitions. Helms somehow made it onto the roster despite being a player having no purpose, quite literally. Most (or maybe just me) thought that he’d be dealt before the end of spring training. There were rumors, including a trade to San Francisco for lefty reliever Steve Kline, but that deal fell through and Kline was simply dropped by the Giants. With Greg Dobbs and Eric Bruntlett on the roster, Helms shouldn’t see a great deal of time — or any — at third base. Nor should he see any time at first base with Ryan Howard there and plenty of other players able to man the position at a higher level, and it’s extremely unlikely they’d use him in a corner outfield spot unless there are a rash of injuries.

I feel sorry for Helms despite all of the items I threw at my TV screen last year after many of his at-bats.

Some Publicity

Chris Illuminati of and I corresponded on a piece they were doing called “The Must-Have Book Guide” for the upcoming baseball season. I, of course, suggested The Bill James Handbook. Check it out here if you’re interested.

Tim Malcom of Phillies Nation organized a “Phloggers Roundtable” — a discussion of the 2008 Phillies team by the bloggers that cover them. I was joined by Tom Goyne of Balls, Sticks, & Stuff as well. Unfortunately, there were a few who weren’t able to make it but some did participate later on, including Enrico Campitelli of The 700 Level, Erik Grissom of Phillies Flow,  and GM Carson of We Should be GM’s.

Click here to check out the “Phloggers Roundtable” at Phillies Nation. My contributions are in teal-colored text.

You Did Ask For It, Ken

I’m usually reluctant to criticize anything Ken Rosenthal writes because it’s usually well-researched and well-defended, unlike a lot of what’s published in newspapers and magazines to be read by millions countrywide. Mr. Rosenthal, however, has written an article defending his selection of the Braves as 2008’s World Series selection waving the red flag at the bull that is the Sabermetric community (not to imply that said community thinks in lockstep).

He starts off his article waving a raw steak just outside the cage where it can’t be reached:

Bloggers, it’s your lucky day.

Not that you ever need prompting to rip apart the latest ill-informed splattering from the mainstream media, but here’s an invitation on a gold-engraved, all-but-autographed platter:

I feel like I really want to punch him*, but he’s begging for it so much that I don’t want to give him the satisfaction.

* I’m actually a pacifist and likely don’t have that great of a punch.

Embarrassing as it is to admit, my annual column predicting which team will win the World Series often defies sabermetric orthodoxy, not to mention conventional logic. Sort of like baseball itself.

The way Rosenthal writes this, it’s like he’s proud of writing stuff that defies logic. “I know conventional logic says that if you throw something up in the air, gravity will bring it back down, but I think that’s balderdash.”

Statistical analysis is an invaluable tool; that discussion is over. But we’ve gotten to the point where everyone from the casual fantasy player to the shrewdest GM wants to know the end of the story before Chapter One is written.

Mercifully, that’s not how the game works.

Well, Ken, I don’t think anyone with a working knowledge of Sabermetrics is using them like a crystal ball. Humans, sadly, have this limitation where they can’t see into the future and put all their money into Bear Stearns.

I often liken traditional statistics and Sabermetrics to different prescriptions of your eye-enhancement of choice (well, are you a glasses person or a contacts person?). Traditional statistics like batting average, RBI, runs scored, won-lost records, saves, etc. all provide a portion of the picture, but not a clear one. To make an analogy to the analogy, traditional statistics are a television circa 1985 with the bunny-eared antenna. Sabermetrics provide a clearer picture, like an HDTV circa 2008. It’s not perfect by any means, but it’s the best we have right now and incredibly useful — they provide an amazingly lifelike picture.

It seems almost as if Kenny is discrediting Sabermetrics for not predicting the future correctly 100% of the time. That’s impossible, for obvious reasons. But they come close relative to the other options we have (guessing, rolling dice). After the 2007 regular season ended, I made an Excel file comparing the results with PECOTA’s pre-season projections and I found that the number of games between PECOTA and reality was…

  • 0 games: 2 teams, 6.7% (both Chicago teams, oddly enough)
  • 1-5 games: 17 teams, 56.7% (ARI, ATL, BAL, BOS, CIN, DET, KC, LAD, MIL, NYM, NYY, PHI, SD, STL, TEX, TOR, WAS)
  • 6-10 games: 8 teams, 26.7% (CLE, COL, FLA, HOU, LAA, OAK, PIT, SF)
  • 11+ games: 3 teams, 10% (MIN, SEA, TB)

You can download the spreadsheet here, if you’d like.

I don’t know how well PECOTA fared in previous years, but its performance in ’07 is impressive: it foresaw the dreadful decline of the White Sox, and the return to Earth of the Tigers, for instance.

So, Ken’s point that you can’t predict the future is valid, but it’s not valid without crediting how much more accurate the predictions can be with the use of Sabermetrics.

The 2005 White Sox, ’06 Cardinals and ’07 Rockies were among the recent World Series clubs that defied the supposed experts, myself included. Some other team will do the same this season, reminding us again that baseball’s unpredictability is part of what makes the game so much fun.

The paradoxy of saying that baseball is unpredictable and then predicting that a team will defy predictions aside… saying that a team will defy predictions to discredit those predictions doesn’t mean much. It’s like using a fortune teller to place all your bets for a week of NFL games, and you get the first 14 games right, and rake in a ton of money. As you sit and watch the Monday Night game, your fortune teller errs and the 49ers somehow beat the Patriots. Despite the fact that the teller has selected 93% of the games correctly* you decide to dwell on the one mistake and throw the baby out with the bath water.

* Obviously, that scenario is entirely facetious. Do not use fortune tellers to help you in your NFL get rich quick scheme.

Bloggers, man your keyboards!

My Spidey Sense is tingling, and I sense derisiveness from Mr. Rosenthal.

My choice to win it all is the Braves.

That’s absolutely fine. I await to see how you back it up with facts.

As the accompanying sidebar suggests, I’ve been largely unsuccessful with my pre-season selections over the years.

An ad hominem on yourself? Unprecedented!

But then, who hasn’t?

PECOTA and other Sabermetric-aided predictions.

The proper time to write a predictions column is actually Aug. 1 or even Sept. 1, after teams adjust their rosters through trades.

There’s no “proper time” to make predictions. A prediction is saying, “Based on the information available, I think that [insert premonition].”

I think what Kenny was trying to get at is that your predictions can be more accurate if you wait a long time to see how things unfold. Thanks.

But such a late analysis would be a copout, and even then, there would be a decent chance of looking like an idiot.

Amateur psychoanalysis here, but it seems like Rosenthal is preoccupied with “looking like an idiot.”

In my NCAA bracket, I had Duke getting to the Elite Eight. I’m such an idiot for thinking that. But other than that, all four of my Final Four teams were alive up until Wisconsin lost to Davidson a few minutes ago. If you’re making a lot of predictions, you’re going to end up getting some of them wrong, and you’re going to end up looking like an idiot on some picks. Bob Knight picked Pittsburgh to win it all, and they lost in the second round. He looks like an idiot but it doesn’t discredit him from ever coaching again or making more predictions.

Grow a pair, Ken, make some predictions and tell us your reasoning behind it. At least if you get it wrong, you can feel good about getting it wrong. Why do I feel like my guidance counselor?

Few imagined last Sept. 1 that the Rockies would make the playoffs and the Mets would not.

Because people lack access to a time portal.

Anyway, here are my general rules for a preseason forecast, knowing that Eliot Spitzer stands a greater chance of being president in 2012 than I do of nailing one of these suckers outright:

An Eliot Spitzer joke. Ken is topical!

And he’s self-deprecating. Me likey.

Never pick the Red Sox.

Never pick the Yankees.

Why? Because they’re good teams? Because they have high payrolls? Why would you not pick these teams to succeed? I mean, if you are scared about looking like an idiot, it seems like you’d want to go with the obvious picks.

Never pick a National League team unless under the influence of imagination-enhancing drugs.

Why? This isn’t the NBA — the National League isn’t the Eastern Conference and the American League isn’t the Western Conference. The best in the NL can compete with the best in the AL.

The Red Sox, winners of two of the last four World Series, probably are the best team on paper. But picking them is like picking the smartest kid in class to finish with the highest SAT.

It’s highly likely that your pick will end up correct, making you look like a genius instead of an idiot?

Besides, the only way for a team to win back-to-back Series is to keep its pitching intact through three postseason rounds for two straight years. Hard to do.

It’s not the only way; it’s a way, albeit a highly good way. According to this logic, last year’s Red Sox could swap Beckett, Schilling, Matsuzaka, et. al. with Johan Santana, Jake Peavy, Brandon Webb, etc. and not increase its chances of winning it all, since their pitching staff is noticeably different.

The Yankees, who have not won the Series since 2000, almost could qualify as a surprise team at this point — almost.

It’s just my own subjective observations, but it seems like a lot in the media are picking the Yankees to make the playoffs. Personally, I have them missing out because I think they are depending too heavily on unproven arms, but I would not be surprised if they won the AL East. They have an offense that will match the heavily-lauded Tigers.

They are a surprise team in that they’re not currently better than the Red Sox or either of the Indians and Tigers, leaving them second in the Wild Card chase at best.

But now that they’re trying to incorporate younger, less expensive players, the Yankees are like the rich kid in the neighborhood who tries to act cool by dressing down. Sorry, the rich kid is still a rich kid — and with dubious pitching, I might add.

These are two sentences that are ripe for amateur psychoanalysis, but I’ll restrain myself for now.

The analogy falls apart because the Yankees aren’t using young pitchers to fit in with the crowd; they’re doing so out of necessity. A better analogy would be the rich kid having all this stuff because his parents own Bear Stearns and then having to find clothing at Goodwill because of, well, you know.

Actually, the NL has produced three of the past seven World Series champions — the ’01 Diamondbacks, the ’03 Marlins and the ’06 Cardinals.Frankly, I’m sensing another NL breakthrough […]

That’s it! Write it down! Ken’s feelin’ it, and he’s feelin’ an NL team winning it all! Dump your Bear Stearns stock and put it in KenRo Inc.

[…] and not simply because two of the best pitchers in the AL, Johan Santana and Dan Haren, were traded to NL clubs. None of the AL contenders looks as dominant as the ’07 Red Sox; I can’t quantify it, but the disparity between the top teams in each league might not be as great in years past.

The ’08 Red Sox don’t look as dominant? I guess if you think losing Curt Schilling for a half-season (potentially more) is damning. It’s a loss, no doubt, but he’s 41 and not anywhere near as dominant as he used to be. Call me crazy, but I think this year’s rotation of Beckett/Matsuzaka/Lester/Buchholz/Wakefield will be nearly as good as last year’s Beckett/Schilling/Matsuzaka/Wakefield/Tavarez-Lester.

Some (not I) would argue that this year’s Tigers look dominant with the addition of Miguel Cabrera. Some (not I) would also argue that this year’s Mariners look dominant with the acquisition of Erik Bedard.

The Indians haven’t changed much and C.C. Sabathia is in a contract year.

The Braves have constructed an AL-type offense.

They have a DH? They are refusing to bunt with their pitchers?

Their bullpen will get a boost if lefty Mike Gonzalez returns from elbow-ligament transplant surgery at mid-season.

That’s great, but what are they going to do in the meantime?

Their rotation features enough options to absorb ineffectiveness and/or injury […]

John Smoltz will start the season on the disabled list and is nearing age 41. Tom Glavine is 42 and his ’07 season was about as bad as his ’03 season (his first with the Mets). Mike Hampton hasn’t pitched in two years and is 35.

Really, the only sure thing is Tim Hudson.

I’m not saying the Braves will again trade for this year’s Mark Teixeira, but they should be able to get the piece or pieces they need.

How do you know what they’ll need? So far, you’ve said that they won’t really need any starting pitching (“enough options”) or bullpen arms (“boost from Mike Gonzalez”), and the Braves are set at catcher, first base, second base, third base, center field, and right field. So, barring catastrophic injuries, the Braves would be trading for a shortstop or left fielder. Otherwise, they’re not really trading for anyone of consequence.

Yet, the Braves aren’t the only legitimate NL threat.

Really? Who’da thunk it?

The Cubs could be a World Series team if they add Brian Roberts.

They won’t:

Baltimore president of baseball operations Andy MacPhail told reporters in Ft. Lauderdale Wednesday that a Brian Roberts deal with the Cubs is off the table.

“We worked at it this long and we don’t have deal,” MacPhail said. “There’s other sides characterizing it as an impasse. You make the judgment.”

The Phillies and Brewers will be very good if their run prevention reasonably complements their run production.

Translation: The Phillies and Brewers will be very good if they score more runs than their opponents.

These observations are reaching John Madden levels.

The Diamondbacks’ young position players should improve offensively, and the Dodgers are just too talented to ignore.

“Guys, who are you all picking to win the NL West?”






“Agh! I can’t take it anymore! The Dodgers! The Dodgers!” (Falls on floor, crying) “They’re too talented!”

Also under consideration: The Mets, who must contend with age and injury concerns, and the defending champion Rockies, whose rotation is a bit of a wild card.

The Rockies’ rotation was a wild card last season and they went to the World Series.

Mostly healthy last season, the Sox already are without Curt Schilling and could start the season without Josh Beckett. Daisuke Matsuzaka’s ’07 load — he averaged more pitches per start than any major-league pitcher — might be another warning sign.

Beckett is shooting for April 6. Unless you think the post-season hopes of the Red Sox will be made or broken by one game, this isn’t really a huge issue.

Will Hideki Okajima be as dominant a reliever this season?

He sure looked dominant last season.

Will Manny Delcarmen emerge as a legitimate late-inning weapon?

44 IP, 1.023 WHIP, 232 ERA+, 41 K, 17 BB in ’07. Looks good to me. All of the projections besides CHONE have him finishing the season with a sub-4.00 ERA and all of them have him pitching 50+ innings.

It’s also difficult to imagine their top three relievers — Joe Borowski, Rafael Betancourt and Rafael Perez — being as good again.

“Ken, we think Borowski, Betancourt, and Perez are going to be good in ’08, but before we publish it, we wanted to check with you. Can you see them being good?”

Ken: (Closes his eyes, grits his teeth, and tries to imagine what ’08 will look like for those three) I see… Abraham Nunez hitting 20 HR, and unicorns, and Adam Eaton winning the Cy Young. But I’m just not seeing those three being nearly as good as they were in ’07. Sorry, guys.”

Borowski wasn’t good last season, by the way. It’s a great illustration of why the save statistic is so flawed. He had 45 saves last season, but he had a 5.07 ERA and a 1.431 WHIP in nearly 66 innings.

On the other hand, Rafael Betancourt has been dominant in each of the past five seasons. He had a 312 ERA+ last season.

Rafael Perez was almost as dominant as Betancourt last season, but he’s only had one full season in the Majors and it is reasonable to expect a decline from him.

A baseball season amounts to 162 episodes of 30 different reality shows.

Why is this comparison even necessary?

Those who think they can figure out the scripts in advance are kidding themselves.

I have a few friends who are very into Rock of Love 2. They have predicted with amazing accuracy which girl is going to get the boot. Why can they do this? They notice how they interact with Bret Michaels, they pay attention to body language and the intricacies of the conversations.*

Similarly, if you do your research, you can be accurate in your predictions.

* This will be the one and only time I will ever mention Rock of Love.

The stats reveal trend lines and tendencies, but in the end the game is played by human beings.

Played by human beings who create those trend lines and tendencies.

I like the Braves … I think.

Bloggers, fire away.

Hope you liked it, Kenny.

It’s On Now!

Fred of Moondog Sports and I have made a friendly wager on the upcoming baseball season. He thinks the Detroit Tigers will score 1,000 runs or more, and I, feeling the Tigers to be overrated, think they will score no more 950 (only about 5% less, however). Fred originally wanted me to link to Bill O’Reilly’s website in my blogroll if I lost, and he’d link to The Huffington Post if he lost. I’m not too fond of The Huffington Post anymore, not for any particular reason other than general disinterest (since everyone is talking only about the upcoming Presidential election), so I offered a new slant on the wager: the loser has to wrote a blog entry of at least 500 words complimenting the winner and his blog. Fred accepted, and now it’s on. May the loser satiate the winner’s ego.

You can catch all of my 2008 MLB Predictions here, and if you’d like to set a friendly wager as well, leave a comment here, send me an E-mail (crashburnalley [at] gmail [dot] com), or an AOL Instant Message.

I Met Chelsea Clinton!

I usually try to stray from the personal blogs, but I just had a really interesting day on Thursday, so I thought I’d share it. I’ll start from the top.

I went with a friend to Delaware County Community College to see poet Sonia Sanchez. To any Delco-based readers, if you ever have a chance to go to one of her presentations, I highly recommend it. Her poetry is not only amazing, but it’s not based on just the words; the way she recited it added just as much as word selection. I found one of the poems she read on YouTube, called “Peace.” She’s highly liberal, so that’s a warning to any of my conservative readers.

Anyway, after that, we went to Wawa for something to eat, and we killed some time before we headed up to West Chester University to see Chelsea Clinton take a two-hour Q & A from the audience. She had fairly lengthy, detailed responses to each of the questions, so I stood there for a good 45 minutes to an hour before my question was taken. The previous questions were cookie-cutters like “What does your mother plan to do about the receding economy?” or “What is Hilary’s stance on stem-cell research?”

Chelsea ClintonI would have none of it. Donning my red Phillies hat and gray Phillies sweatshirt, I held my arm up and waved it around frantically, begging for her attention. It worked, and I had the floor for the next question for the daughter of one of the top two Democratic Presidential nominees. With TV cameras and dozens of college kids’ cameras and cell phones pointed at me, I summoned my stately voice and calmly asked her, “Since you’re in this area of Pennsylvania, how well do you think the Phillies are going to do this year?”

I got a mixed response: half laughter, half “this guy’s a jackass.” To Chelsea’s credit, she took it in stride and simply said (to paraphrase), “I’m from New York so I’m not going to go there.”

After the Q & A was over, about 75 or so people hung around and moved up front to meet, get autographs from, and take pictures with Ms. Clinton. I and my four comrades took this opportunity and waited our turn. When I got to the front of the line, I was given the unfortunate task of having to take someone else’s picture. And in case you’re asking, no, I did not screw up the picture. I was anxious to meet Ms. Clinton though. After the camera flash, I swiftly walked up to her and asked her, “Hey, did you like my Phillies question?”

“Oh, that was you?” she replied.

“Yeah, I like to keep people on their toes like that. Hi, I’m Bill Baer — nice to meet you.”

“My pleasure,” said the daughter of former President Bill and former First Lady and hopeful President Hilary Clinton.  “My boyfriend’s from Philly, so he’d be on your side with that question.”

My days are usually monotonous, so this was quite a welcome bit of excitement for me, and oddly enough, not one second of my day was sports-related (besides my clothing and my questioning). I ignored my NCAA bracket (still got 3 of the 4 games today) and spring training baseball. It was worth it.

Still not going to vote for Hilary, though. Or anyone for that matter.

Opening Day… Technically

Despite the countdown at the top right of Crashburn Alley, the Major League Baseball season officially started at 6 A.M. when the Oakland Athletics and the Boston Red Sox duked it out in front of nearly 45,000 fans at the Tokyo Dome.

If you were sleeping or working and couldn’t catch the game, you missed a doozy. Before I begin my recap of the game, I just have to vent and say that I just have a strong disliking of ESPN’s broadcasters. I’m sure some of it is irrational, but it was so annoying to watch the game this morning because at the end of every inning that Daisuke Matsuzaka pitched, Gary Thorne and Steve Phillips would comment on how many pitches he’s thrown and that it’s unlikely that he’d be back for another inning. This started in the third inning and Matsuzaka went five.

Anyway, Mark Ellis started the scoring with a first inning solo home run to left field, and Bobby Crosby, later in the inning, knocked Daric Barton in with a grounder to pitcher Matsuzaka. Both pitchers looked good, as it was 2-0 until the top of the sixth inning, when Joe Blanton began to tire. Dustin Pedroia led off with a well-struck double to right-center field, and Kevin Youkilis followed with a four-pitch walk. Blanton got David Ortiz to a full count and forced him to foul out on the sixth pitch, but Manny Ramirez backed him up by ripping a first-pitch double to left field, scoring both runners. Later in the inning, eventual hero Brandon Moss — a last-minute substitute for the back-troubled J.D. Drew — singled to right field to score Ramirez, bumping the score to 3-2.

In the bottom half of the sixth, right-hander Kyle Snyder relieved Matsuzaka in a most unimpressive fashion. He allowed a lead-off single to Bobby Crosby and a meatball two-run homerun to Jack Hannahan, immediately blowing the lead the Red Sox were holding. To Snyder’s credit, he cut the Athletics off there and quickly got three outs to end the inning.

Fast-forward to the top of the ninth, where Athletics closer Huston Street was attempting to nail down a 4-3 victory. He retired lead-off hitter Mike Lowell, but Moss nailed Street’s fifth pitch of the at-bat — down and inside — into the right field stands for a game-tying solo home run. That wouldn’t be the end of Street’s night.

Athletics manager Bob Geren decided to leave Street in for the top of the tenth inning. In retrospect, that wasn’t exactly a wise decision, but it’s always easier to second guess when you know the results. Street got Julio Lugo to ground out to third base, but it was hit too deep and combined with his speed, he was safe at first. Pedroia promptly bunted him over to put the go-ahead run in scoring position. Street appeared to rebound by striking out Kevin Youkilis on a high fastball, but after intentionally walking David Ortiz with first base open, he had to get by Manny Ramirez, who already had a two-run double to his credit. He’d make it two. On a 1-2 count, Ramirez drove a high fastball to deep center field, and based on his reaction — he stood at home plate admiring his hit for a good three seconds — he thought it was a home run. Instead, it was a two-run double that brought the Red Sox ahead 6-4.

Cue Jonathan Papelbon, celebrated dancer and closer. Normally lights out, Papelbon was wild enough to allow this game to continue to be captivating. He walked Daric Barton, who gave him a tough at-bat. Jack Cust worked the count to 1-2, then chased a high fastball to strike out for the fourth time in the game (he’s on pace for 648!). Emil Brown, formerly of the K.C. Royals, had a chance to be a hero, and turned into a goat with some extremely poor base running. He took a first-pitch fastball — high, as had been Papelbon’s style throughout his inning of work — and drove it to deep right-center. Barton scored easily, but Brown got greedy and tried to take third base on the throw in to home plate, but it was cut off and he was forced into a run-down and easily tagged out after a couple back-and-forth throws. Instead of it being a one-run deficit with a runner in scoring position and one out, it was a one-run deficit with no runners on base and two outs. To pour salt on Brown’s wound, both of the hitters immediately following him — Bobby Crosby and Jack Hannahan — both singled, so he would have definitely scored if he had been on second base (of course, we’ll never know if either would have singled had that been the case, but it’s fun to assume). The game was wrapped up when Kurt Suzuki grounded out to first base, giving Papelbon a very hard-fought save, and Hideki Okajima — the other Red Sox player from Japan — the win.

If you had been up early enough to catch the game, it was well worth it. I think Major League Baseball is starting a new trend: instead of afternoon and evening baseball, we can have morning baseball; instead of hot dogs, popcorn, and beer, we can have scrambled eggs, French toast, and coffee with our game. I like it!

In other news…

John Patterson

In case you hadn’t heard, the Nationals released Patterson, author of a 130 ERA+ and 1.195 WHIP in 2005. Since then, though, he’s been ineffective and injury-prone. Still, you have to wonder why the Phillies didn’t extend a helping hand his way. The team is in desperate need of a #5 starter not named Adam Eaton, and none of the other contenders are doing much to earn that spot. If Kris Benson, who is more injury-prone and ineffective, is worth the flier, why not Patterson?

I am left befuddled by some of the non-moves by the Phillies’ front office. Apparently, Kyle Lohse isn’t good enough for them, but Kris Benson, J.D. Durbin, and Travis Blackley are.

Cleveland Indians

The Indians have — and had — a few arms who could and should interest the Phillies.

First off, the Tribe released left-handed reliever Aaron Fultz, a former Phillie. Fultz has been a great reliever in two out of his last three years: in ’05, he put up a 196 ERA+ and a 0.968 WHIP for the Phils, and last season, he put up a 158 ERA and a 1.324 WHIP for the Indians. Even in ’06, bad by Fultz’s standards, was above league-average: a 103 ERA+. The Phillies are in need of another left-handed reliever to complement J.C. Romero, and Mike Zagurski may need “Tommy John” surgery.

From David Murphy of the Philadelphia Daily News:

The Indians released former Phillies reliever Aaron Fultz yesterday, but don’t expect him land in Philadelphia. Ruben Amaro said the team has no interest in bringing back the lefthander, who pitched for the Phillies in 2005 and 2006.

Unless the Indians have a really good reason for cutting Fultz, the Phillies ought to look long and hard at themselves if they pass up on Fultz.

To continue on the theme of the Indians, I cite Nick Cafardo of

The Phillies are in the market for both a lefty reliever (someone to go with J.C. Romero) and a starter. Looks like rehab project Kris Benson may take the No. 5 spot since Adam Eaton has been horrible, but the Phillies are concerned about their pitching and Cole Hamels’s poor start.

Colorado pitcher Brian Fuentes remains a target of a few teams, the Tigers, Yankees, and Phillies in particular.

The Indians have an interesting scenario that could result in a trade. Cliff Lee is taking the No. 5 job with a very good camp, but the Tribe also has Jeremy Sowers and Aaron Laffey in the hunt. There are plenty of teams out there – including the Cardinals, Phillies, Astros – eyeing the lefties.

That article is from more than a week ago, but it’s still relevant. The Indians officially named Lee as their #5 starter, which makes Sowers and Laffey available. Neither has been particularly impressive, but both are around league-average, which is all the Phillies need. Laffey pitched 49 and one-third innings last season, his only season of Major League experience, and put up a 101 ERA+ and a 1.338 WHIP. Sowers has two seasons of Major League experience, and he averages about a 95 ERA+ and a 1.349 WHIP. His ’06 season was much more impressive than his ’07 season, however, so he remains a bit of a question mark.

The article also mentions Brian Fuentes of the Colorado Rockies, another left-hander, but he’s much more pricey, and the Phillies don’t need to overpay for a second left-handed reliever. The price they’d pay for Fuentes would be worth it if they desperately needed a set-up man or closer, but they have four pitchers who can pitch in those roles interchangeably: Brad Lidge (recovering from surgery and will start the season on the DL), Tom Gordon (the team’s de facto closer in Lidge’s absence), Ryan Madson, and Romero.

Questionably, Cafardo states that the Phillies are in the market for a left-handed starter as well, but I can’t see that as being accurate. The Phillies already have Cole Hamels and Jamie Moyer, both left-handers, in the rotation. There’s no reason to need a third. If you have three, great, you have three. You just don’t go hunting for a #5 starter who is specifically left-handed — you take what you can get.


Should the Phillies add one or more relievers from the outside, they would risk losing Francisco Rosario (who is on the disabled list), J.D. Durbin, Travis Blackley, and Clay Condrey because they are all out of options and can’t be sent back to the Minor Leagues unless they clear waivers, where the other 29 teams have a chance to claim them. Granted, they are nothing special, but given the dearth of reliable arms in the Phillies’ system, these guys are really the best they have.

A Look at the Phils by the Numbers

Michael Salfino contributed to with a Sabermetric look at the 2008 Phillies. It’s very well-done — check it out.

We’re using three different projection systems. The father of the sabermetric movement, Bill James, is represented as published in “The Bill James Handbook.”

Dan Szymborski’s ZiPS projections come courtesy of, which consistently lives up to its name. ZiPS looks at similar skills more than players in calculating projections. Because I don’t want this piece to turn into a wall of numbers, let’s focus primarily on OPS (on-base plus slugging pecentage).

We’ll work our way down the Phillies’ projected lineup, starting at the top with the reigning MVP.

Joey Gathright — Holy Smokes!

You have got to be kidding me. Joey Gathright has already jumped over a car, but in an actual game, he jumped over a pitcher attempting to tag him!

Crashburn Alley 2008 MLB Predictions

In my ever-increasing genius, I have the great idea of not only making predictions, but recording them on a medium where others can check back later and ridicule me. If you haven’t seen them yet, I put my NCAA bracket up for public view here (note: I did make a couple changes to it a couple hours before the first game; I went 14-for-16 yesterday). Now I’m going to put up my 2008 MLB prognostications.

Let’s start with the awards.

Most Valuable Player

AL: Alex Rodriguez, New York Yankees

A-Rod’s an easy pick.

NL: Chase Utley, Philadelphia Phillies

Utley completes the MVP trifecta in Philly.

Cy Young

AL: Roy Halladay, Toronto Blue Jays

His ERA+ has gone down every season since ’05, but he did pitch 225 innings with a 1.24 WHIP last season. That 120 ERA+ is bad by his standards, but great by others’. All of the projections expect some degree of improvement.

NL: Aaron Harang, Cincinnati Reds

This is a sleeper pick of sorts, but he’s a legitimate contender for the Cy Young award. He’ll give you 230+ innings, walk very few, and strike out a lot (more than 8 K’s per 9 inning the last two seasons). Johan Santana is the sexy pick and you can’t go wrong with him, either.

Rookie of the Year

AL: Evan Longoria, Tampa Bay Rays

Too obvious not to follow the pack on this one.

NL: Cameron Maybin, Florida Marlins

While the Marlins are odds-on favorites to finish 5th in the division, Maybin will be a rare bright spot.

Manager of the Year

AL: Joe Maddon, Tampa Bay Rays

I wanted to go with Eric Wedge of the Cleveland Indians, but managers tend not to defend their titles here. Bobby Cox (’04 & ’05) is the only manager to have done so since the award was created in 1983.

NL: Clint Hurdle, Colorado Rockies

The NL has a load of viable choices, but I think that leading the Rockies to their first division title in franchise history will seal the deal.

Comeback Player of the Year

AL: Kenny Rogers, Detroit Tigers

Kenny Rogers will successfully rebound from an injury-shortened ’07 season to be one of the few Tigers pitchers who end up helping out (along with Justin Verlander, obviously).

NL: Mike Hampton, Atlanta Braves

As long as he doesn’t completely blow up, average production should earn him enough sympathy points (he hasn’t pitched since ’05) to grab the award.

Home Run Leaders

AL: Alex Rodriguez, New York Yankees, 51

NL: Ryan Howard, Philadelphia Phillies, 54

Most Overrated

AL: Erik Bedard, Seattle Mariners

The trade from Baltimore not only gave Bedard a new home, but lots of unnecessary praise as well. 2007 was really the only great season of Bedard’s career, even though he’d started 24+ games in each season since ’04. His strikeout rate jumped from 7.9-ish from ’04 to ’06, to nearly 11 last season. I call aberration.

NL: Aaron Rowand, San Francisco Giants

Recipient of a five-year, $60 million deal from the Giants, Rowand goes into ’08 with some high expectations. The fact is that he is only a slightly better-than-average player. His ’04 and ’07 season are similar in that they were both good (130 and 123 OPS+ respectively), but his ’05 and ’06 seasons are also similar in that they were both bad (93 and 86 OPS+ respectively). His defense is even overrated: he ranked 15th out of 17 qualified MLB CF in RZR last season).

Most Underrated

AL: Brian Bannister, Kansas City Royals

Granted, this is a tiny bit of a biased pick, since there was an article written by Jeff Passan of Yahoo! Sports that revealed his appreciation for Sabermetrics. But in 165 innings last season, he allowed an average of only 1.2 baserunners per inning, and averaged less than two-and-a-half walks per 9 innings. Add to that his small allowance of home runs and you have a pitcher that a lot of people will be overlooking simply because he plays on a down-and-out team in Kansas City.

NL: Brad Lidge, Philadelphia Phillies

Call it a homer pick, but I’ve been reading all off-season about his mental issues that have stemmed from that home run he gave up to Albert Pujols in Game 5 of the 2005 NLCS. To quote myself:

After that game against the Phillies on April 23 until the end of the season, Lidge pitched 60 and two-thirds innings, struck out 81, and put up a 2.82 ERA. He finished the season with a 131 ERA+ and a 1.254 WHIP, impressive statistics for a closer deemed mentally anguished.

He seems to have recovered fine from his second knee surgery of the off-season as well:

Lidge pitched in a minor league intrasquad game Thursday at Clearwater, Fla., retiring four of the five batters he faced with three strikeouts and a walk. The right-hander, who had arthroscopic knee surgery last month, looked sharp enough that he just might be available for the NL East champions on opening day.

“I felt great with everything from warming up to throwing in the game,” Lidge said. “There is nothing better than facing hitters and that was a lot of fun.”

Breakout Player

AL: Jeremy Guthrie, Baltimore Orioles

With Bedard gone, Guthrie may be the de facto ace in the rotation. He’s game for it. Last season, in more than 175 innings, he put up a decent K-rate and a good walk rate, and allowed just over 1.2 baserunners per 9 innings.

NL: Andre Ethier, Los Angeles Dodgers

Ethier has had a lot of hype, but hasn’t done anything spectacular in his 843 Major League at-bats. This is the year for him, and he’ll be a major player in bringing the Dodgers from a league-average offense to a top-five offense (that’s right, you heard it here first).

Surprise Team

AL: Tampa Bay Rays

Too easy.

NL: Atlanta Braves

A lot of people are picking the Reds in a very winnable division, but more people are overlooking the Atlanta Braves in favor of the Mets and Phillies.

Disappointing Team

AL: Toronto Blue Jays

I have the Cy Young coming from the Jays, but otherwise, they’re still going to disappoint. Mediocre offense and questionable pitching, as a lot of those who had success last year were young and you just can’t expect everyone to repeat. I expect a significant drop-off in pitching (you heard it here first, and now you know why I don’t get paid to make these predictions).

NL: Milwaukee Brewers

They will have an above-average offense, but that’s about it. Their starting rotation is scary bad, and their bullpen is relatively the same. Eric Gagne should be great for them so long as he stays healthy.

All right, let’s get to the Over/Unders.

Per Batter’s Box, here are the Vegas lines, followed by my predictions. A + next to my prediction means I’m taking the over, and a means I’m taking the under.

Arizona     	86.5
Atlanta        	84.5
Baltimore   	65.5
Boston        	93.5
Chicago(NL)    	87.5
Chicago(AL)    	79.5
Cincinnati    	79.5
Cleveland    	88.5
Colorado    	82.5
Detroit        	93.5
Florida        	68.5
Houston        	72.5
Kansas City    	71.5
Los Angeles(AL)	91.5
Los Angeles(NL)	87.5
Milwaukee    	84.5
Minnesota    	72.5
New York(NL)    93.5
New York(AL)    93.5
Oakland        	73.5
Philadelphia    87.5
Pittsburgh    	68.5
San Diego    	84.5
San Francisco   71.5
Seattle        	86.5
St Louis	78.5
Tampa Bay    	73.5
Texas        	74.5
Toronto        	85.5
Washington    	70.5

NL East

NYM: 94-68 +
PHI: 90-72 +
ATL: 84-78 –
WAS: 74-88 +
FLA: 71-91 +

NL Central

CHC: 87-75 –
MIL: 80-82 –
CIN: 75-87 –
HOU: 74-88 +
STL: 71-91 –
PIT: 66-96 –

NL West

COL: 91-71 +
ARI: 89-73 +
LAD: 87-75 –
SDP: 80-82 –
SFG: 68-94 –


AL East

BOS: 92-70 –
NYY: 87-75 –
TOR: 80-82 –
TBR: 79-83 +
BAL: 67-95 +

AL Central

CLE: 94-68 +
DET: 92-70 –
MIN: 78-84 +
CHW: 75-87 –
KCR: 74-88 +

AL West

LAA: 90-72 –
SEA: 84-78 –
TEX: 81-81 +
OAK: 73-89 –

I’m almost 100% sure my win-loss totals add up to 2,430-2,430, but if you take the time to check it out, let me know if it doesn’t add up.

Now let’s move on to the playoffs.

American League

East: Boston Red Sox

Central: Cleveland Indians

West: Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim

Wild Card: Detroit Tigers

National League

East: New York Mets

Central: Chicago Cubs

West: Colorado Rockies

Wild Card: Philadelphia Phillies

Division Series

Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim @ Cleveland Indians: Cleveland advances in 4 games

Detroit Tigers @ Boston Red Sox: Boston advances in 3 games

New York Mets @ Chicago Cubs: New York advances in 5 games

Philadelphia Phillies @ Colorado Rockies: Colorado advances in 4 games

Championship Series

Boston Red Sox @ Cleveland Indians: Cleveland advances in 6 games

Colorado Rockies @ New York Mets: Colorado advances in 5 games

World Series

Colorado Rockies @ Cleveland Indians: Cleveland wins in 6 games

That’s it. Feel free to tell me why I’m wrong and post your own predictions.

State of the News Media 2008

This is an extremely intriguing collection of data regarding the “traditional” media and the “new” media (bloggers, Wikipedia).

Citizen Media

Despite the proliferation of blogs, survey data suggest most Americans have yet to accept them as significant news sources. According to a winter 2007 Zogby Poll, blogs were the lowest on the list of “important” sources of news, coming in at 30%, well after Web sites (81%), television (78%), radio (73%), newspapers (69%) and magazines (38%). More Americans, 39%, chose friends and neighbors over blogs as an important informational source.

Other research found that Americans appeared to be more interested in blogs for their entertainment value than their importance as a news source. According to August 2007 data published by the marketing research firm Synovate, 49% of all Americans read blogs because they find them entertaining, 26% because of a particular hobby or interest and 15% for news and information.

That appears to jibe with citizen bloggers’ own interests. The Pew Internet & American Life Project found in 2006 that most bloggers wrote about issues other than news. Nearly four in ten (37%) said they blogged mainly about their “life and experiences,” with issues of public life (11%) cited as the second most popular topic area. Just 5% said they concentrated primarily on news and current events.

If citizens are gravitating to blogs more for personal pleasure, traditional media are working to connect them more to the news. Fully 95% of the top 100 newspapers included blogs from reporters in March 2007, up from 80% in 2006, according to research conducted by the Bivings Group.


July 2007 data from Synovate suggest that nearly half of all Americans report ever having read a blog, but the numbers are growing rapidly. That is notably higher than the 39% the Pew Internet and American Life Project reported in the winter of 2006. And that number was up from the 27% Pew Internet found a year earlier.

And that universe appears to be much larger among the young. According to Synovate’s data, 78% of adults 18 to 24 years old have read blogs. These younger adults also were more likely to notice ads on blogs, 61% compared to 43% over all.

Only a small core of all adults, however, are regular blog readers, according to Synovate’s research. Just 15% read a blog daily and only 5% more than once a day. In comparison, three in ten (28%) were monthly visitors. And the largest group of blog readers (39%) visited them less than once a month, according to the research.

Journalist Survey

Journalists have become markedly more pessimistic about the future of their profession.

But their concerns are taking a distinctly new turn. Rather than worrying as much about quality, they are now focused on economic survival. And in that new focus, we see signs of new openness to change.

Journalists are ready — even eager — to embrace new technologies. They think a range of new digital activities, from blogs to citizen media, are good for journalism. They even think, by 2 to 1, that splitting their time across multiple platforms is a positive change rather than a problem that is taking time from their reporting or spreading them thin. These are all attitudes hard to imagine a few years ago.

It is also striking what is not here in these numbers. The fears of a decade ago in journalism have faded. News people are less concerned about credibility. They are not as worried about cynicism. They do not feel as isolated. It is possible that technology has helped alleviate these concerns, but it is also possible that there are simply bigger problems today, problems that are more concrete and less cultural.

The problems are about money. The crisis in journalism in 2008, journalists now more clearly believe, is a crisis of a broken economic model. And cutbacks in the newsroom, covering fewer things is now a concern front and center instead of how they are covered.

Those concerns will either be solved or journalism as people traditionally think of it — reporters out in the community bearing witness to facts — will shrink substantially.


At the national level, more than six in ten journalists and senior executives now think journalism is headed in the wrong direction; less than a third are optimistic. TV and radio journalists at national news networks, many of whom entered 2007 with hopes of growth as online video became more widely used, are among the most pessimistic of all. All of these numbers are up from 2004.

Online journalists working for established news outlets see things in a slightly better light, but even they are more negative than positive. Half see journalism headed in the wrong direction (versus 42% who said things are moving forward.)

Only one group, local news executives are generally optimistic (65%).


The vast majority now see great value in having a place on the Web site where users can post comments. Smaller majorities say that citizen-started Web sites are a good thing. (Print journalists are slightly more accepting of the practice than TV and radio journalists.) And they are less upbeat about users posting content directly onto news sites. Yet even here a sizable minority is positively inclined, nearly four in ten TV and radio or print journalists see it as a good thing.

Given the comments from the likes of Bob Costas (note: my entry is now updated with a response to his “clarification” with Deadspin), Bill Conlin, and Stephen A. Smith, we can now see with this data that their opinions are not widely held in the journalism industry.

However, we can also see with the data potential reasons why they spew such vitriol at bloggers: job security. Costas, Conlin, and Smith are all probably wealthy enough to withstand losing their jobs due to their employers going out of business, but they all probably have a passion for their jobs as well, and that’s what they fear losing primarily. That’s just some amateur psychoanalysis, though with a lot of assumptions.

Overall, the data is interesting and bodes well for bloggers. Check it out.

Free-Floating Thoughts and Links

Recently, I responded to some feisty comments from Robert Quinlan Costas. The fun hasn’t ended, folks! I urge my seven loyal readers (Hi, grandma!) to check out John Brattain’s takes on those comments:

Speaking of Mr. Brattain, he corresponded with me regarding some questions the Phillies face going into the ’08 regular season, so check that out at The Hardball Times.

Spring Training Doom and Gloom

Per the Philadelphia Daily News, Brett Myers thinks that the team’s dismal spring training performances are meaningless. Manager Charlie Manuel disagrees. Spring training numbers don’t correlate with regular season numbers… yada, yada, yada… this is one rare point in which I believe the numbers aren’t necessary here.

Of course Brett Myers thinks spring training games are meaningless: he has nothing to fight for in the spring. Maybe that’s why he’s been performing so well, too. However, the pitchers who are really stinking it up — Adam Eaton, Travis Blackley, J.D. Durbin, Kyle Kendrick — have little job security to fall back on. To them, spring training games should be just as meaningful as regular season games because they may not even see Major League regular season games, especially at the rate they’re going.

If Eaton and The Gang can’t put it together with a metaphorical gun to the heads of their Major League jobs, why am I to believe that they’ll somehow “flip a switch” once March 31 rolls around?

Kyle Lohse

Lohse, client of super-agent Scott Boras, rolled the dice this off-season searching for a deal in the ballpark of what Carlos Silva got: 4 years, $48 million. No one bit, but the Phillies did offer him a 3-year, $21 million contract, which was declined. Lohse went jobless all off-season, and it was eerie, since league-average pitchers like him are usually snapped up quickly and suited in cash. The Cardinals gave him a one-year deal worth $4.25 million.

Prescription weight losing drugs i.e. levitra and cialis aren’t made for people who only wish to lose some pounds for cosmetic reasons and use drugs an alternate to plastic surgery. These and other drugs such as viagra are usually reserved for folks who are not capable of achieving or maintaining health and weight via diet in addition to exercise, and often have health issues as a result.

As recently as two weeks ago, Phillies assistant GM Mike Arbuckle (who, along with Ruben Amaro Jr., is a top candidate to take over for Pat Gillick when he departs after this season) said in regards to Lohse, “I know we’re not interested” even when Lohse said he’d take a one-year deal worth between $4 and $10 million. Why no interest?

The only plausible reasoning I can think of is Scott Boras. He and the Phillies have a bitter past (think J.D. Drew on draft day), and the two sides may have just been unwilling to negotiate with each other. If this explanation is actually true, then this is a colossal failure to do right by the people who keep the team in business. The front office owes it to the fans and to the players to put together the best team they can to attempt to win a World Series. Lohse, a league-average pitcher who would slot in at #5 in the Phillies rotation, gives the team a noticeably better chance at accomplishing that goal. Teams kill for a league-average pitcher at the back of the rotation, and Lohse was asking for well below market value!

Instead, the Phillies will allow the wound that is the back of the starting rotation to have the bacteria that are Eaton, Blackley, and Durbin fester. Kris Benson won’t be ready to attempt to help the Phillies until May at the earliest.

There is just no logical explanation I can think of as to why the Phillies had no interest in Lohse. There has to be something about him that not even the media knows about. Or maybe the Phillies’ front office is just incompetent.


Just so everyone can see just what an idiot I am, I have taken screenshots of my bracket on ESPN (I have no idea if I can just send you a link to it; if so, I couldn’t find it). Remember to check back when the tournament is all done and tell me what an idiot I am. Or you can do it now, too.

East | Midwest | South | West | Final Four

Speaking of predictions, I’ll have my MLB predictions put up a day or two before the start of the regular season March 25.

The Greatest Steeplechase Fall Ever

From the San Marcos Daily Record, Tyler Mayforth recalls the most embarrassing moment of his life, and it’s plastered on YouTube.

UPDATED: Bob Costas, You’re On Notice!

Joining the ranks of Marcus Hayes and Bill Conlin is Robert Quinlan Costas, or as many in “the biz” know him, Bob Costas.

On Notice

He has some not-so-nice things to say about bloggers in an article written by Barry Jackson of The Miami Herald.

Costas, speaking before he emceed (and donated $50,000) at Tuesday’s Make-a-Wish sports auction at the Broward County Convention Center, doesn’t understand what compels so many nonjournalist sports fans to seek a forum for their opinions.

I don’t know… maybe it’s the enjoyment one gets out of discussing something you enjoy? I’d much rather talk with a bunch of baseball fans than with some Englishmen about cricket. Wouldn’t you?

Why is one’s lack of journalism credentials prudent to seeking “a forum” for his opinion?

Before the Internet, most fans were content talking about sports with their buddies.

It’s funny that this line of reasoning is somehow passable. Try it in another context.

“Before anesthesia, most patients were content having open heart surgery while wide awake.”

”Today, I saw on ESPN a poll about which Western Conference teams would not make the playoffs,” Costas said. “Well, 46 percent said the Denver Nuggets, which has zero percent influence on anything. […]

A) Voting in an online poll != Blogging.

B) Welcome to the world of voting, Bob! Your vote has never had any influence on anything meaningful, ever. Voting is an illusion of democracy.

[…]Who has the time or the inclination to do this, even if you’re sitting on your computer? Why would you weigh in on it?”

There are many reasons why you’d vote in an online poll:

  • It’s easy.
  • You’re bored.
  • You’re feeling mischievous and you vote 12,000 times for the most ridiculous answer to the question “Who will win the NBA championship?”
  • You actually believe that your vote will have a meaningful impact.

‘But it’s one thing if somebody just sets up a blog from their mother’s basement in Albuquerque and they are who they are, and they’re a pathetic get-a-life loser[…]

Oh, boy. First, I’ll focus on the obvious: not all bloggers live in their mothers’ basements (talk to the elbow ’cause the hand is on vacation).

Not all bloggers are “pathetic get-a-life losers,” either. Many simply blog as an activity. Bloggers can just as easily be neurosurgeons as they can be fry cooks at Wendy’s. That’s the beauty of it, actually. The internet provides a true democracy of opinion. Dictators like Costas, however, would prefer the power rest in the hands of the elite, the haughty sports journalists. Don’t you know, sports journalists can do stuff that regular people just can’t do!

Let’s see, sports journalists…

  • Watch games, and record important events from those games.
  • Talk to integral people involved with those games.
  • Write a narrative about the event using quotes from the people spoken to.

That’s stuff that even Harvard-graduated neurosurgeons can’t fathom. “I know how to send electromagnetic signals to the thalamus*, but I just can’t put into words what occurred during the Blue Jays-Twins game! And I have no idea what Ron Gardenhire is saying: ‘The ump blew a few calls.’ What?”

* I have no idea if this is even necessary, much less possible.

[…] but now that pathetic get-a-life loser can piggyback onto someone who actually has some level of professional accountability and they can be comment No. 17 on Dan Le Batard’s column or Bernie Miklasz’ column in St. Louis. That, in most cases, grants a forum to somebody who has no particular insight or responsibility. Most of it is a combination of ignorance or invective.”

How can a blogger “piggyback” onto someone? I’m not following this one (I realize it’s metaphorical). Is commenting on an article “piggybacking”? Is blogging about an article (as I am doing here) “piggybacking”? My understanding of the term is that you actually have to have some kind of tangible gain from someone else’s work.

Decent choice with Dan LeBatard, though. He seems to have his head on straight:

The Celtics don’t get to be the best team in the East because they have three superstars and play exceptional defense, which seems obvious enough. They’re great because of the ”chemistry” and ”determination” and ”leadership” of those three great players, but might yet lose to the ”unity” and ”experience” and ”clutchness” of Detroit, a team with, um, four great players.

Truth is, at the top of the sports food chain, the difference between the most talented teams — and the most important of the intangibles — is often dumb luck. You, too, can beat the clutchness of Tom Brady and genius of Bill Belichick and desire of Wes Welker if David Tyree happens to catch the ball off the top of his helmet after Eli Manning magically becomes Vince Young.

Back to the subject, why just flat assume that those commenting have “no particular insight”? I’m a cynic of the highest degree, but that is just too cynical even for my tastes, and it reeks of elitism.

Costas seems to think that his degree in journalism somehow gave him the power to understand everything sports-related.

Internet and talk radio commentary that “confuses simple mean-spiritedness and stupidity with edginess. Just because I can call someone a name doesn’t mean I’m insightful or tough and edgy. It means I’m an idiot.”

So, Costas has a problem with people on the Internet calling each other names. The pot calls the kettle black. Let’s recap:

  • Bloggers set up blogs from their mom’s basement in Albuquerque.
  • These bloggers are pathetic get-a-life losers.
  • People who comment on articles have no insight and are ignorant.

It’s true: people are more likely to act immaturely since they are protected by the anonymity the Internet provides. Let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water, however.

Lastly, I’d be offended if I was from Albuquerque. What does that have to do with loserdom?

“It’s just a high-tech place for idiots to do what they used to do on bar stools or in school yards, if they were school yard bullies, or on men’s room walls in gas stations. That doesn’t mean that anyone with half a brain should respect it.”

So, blogging about how David Wright > Jimmy Rollins for ’07 NL MVP, for instance, is something I’d do while sitting in a bar? Sure. So is pontificating about U.S. foreign policy, asking for cheap one-liners, and begging for my car keys after my 9th beer.

I don’t see how being a school bully has anything to do with blogging. Is this a Freudian slip? Bob… is there something you’d like to talk about? Is it not the bloggers who are wedgie-prone, but you?
I don’t know about you, but I’ve never seen someone write on a men’s room wall, “David Wright > Jimmy Rollins for ’07 NL MVP because he has a higher OBP/SLG, plays better defense, and has comparable base-stealing ability.”

Most bloggers do a great job in adding to the dialogue in a broad array of subjects. I get more of my sports information from bloggers (I have five blogs with RSS buttons in my browser, still more in my favorites; none on both counts for newspaper and magazine websites, including ESPN). I think it’s the same way for most Web surfers.

If we can infer one thing from Costas’ unnecessary, immature, factless rant, it’s that his displeasure over bloggers and the people who read and comment on them is based on the fact that they are competition for his job. Bloggers do for free what elitists like Costas do for six-figure incomes, and many do it at a comparable level and are more entertaining in the process.

Focusing on those who comment on articles is fallacious. It’s what a statistics-inclined person would describe as a “small sample size.” Making a judgment based on two sentences is awfully flawed. It’s absolutely true that more than just a few people who leave comments do so to start flame wars, to spam, or to simply make a (usually) unfunny joke that adds nothing to the intellectual level of the conversation.

The next step up for Costas is calling for comment Eugenics. “Want to leave a comment on a Bob Costas article? Take the 30-minute IQ test. If you score 110 or higher, your comment will be held in moderation for approval by Mr. Robert Quinlan Costas himself.”

Even worse is imagining how he’d handle blogging. “So, you wish to start a blog about the Cincinnati Reds? Answer the following question: Do you have a degree in journalism?”

If you answer no, your computer immediately shuts down and you become unable to access the Internet through a browser the next time you turn it on. If you answer yes, you are instead redirected to a Google image search for “Bob Costas.”

Just be glad that elitists like Costas aren’t in charge of policing the Internet.

UPDATED: Costas contacted Deadspin to clarify his comments.

I noted that many of the comments expressed disappointment. I wanted to clarify and amplify my points, not backtrack or apologize or anything.

He’s sticking to his guns. Okay.

No entity has a monopoly over good writing from a valid point of view. In that sense, the more the merrier. In fact, many bloggers, on numerous subjects, sports included, are talented, humorous and bring fresh perspectives.

(Scowl slowly turns into a smile) Good.

My commentary was aimed solely at a portion of Internet sports discourse, an unfortunately large portion, that consists of nothing more than potshots, ad hominem arguments, ignorance and invective. No one who is familiar with the general tone of public discourse, whether it be sports, politics, whatever, can honestly deny that much. It comes from that direction.

Okay, but these aren’t “bloggers.”

I was absolutely not saying that most or all bloggers were losers. It just seems so often that commenters use insults in the place of arguments.

Bloggers != Commenters.

And if some bloggers do use “The Yankees suck” instead of “The Red Sox have better pitching, and a comparable offense and defense,” they’re not going to stick around for a while and they’re not worth reading. Perhaps I’ve happened to avoid blogs that do this, but I haven’t noticed any legitimate blogs that ad hominem their way home.

But forgive me for not placing the exact same value on an comment on a political blog that I would to something said by Ted Koppel. Sure, they have the equal value in a voting booth. But you have to assume that if you’ve done something reasonable well for an extended period of time, you have some notion of what you’re talking about.

Is 2+2=4 any less correct if George W. Bush says it as opposed to Albert Einstein saying it?

Costas rails against people using ad hominem arguments, but this is the basic ad hominem form:

[Claim] is right because [positive quality about the claimant; not evidence for claim].

Costas is likely railing against the converse:

[Claim] is wrong because [negative quality about the claimant; not evidence against claim].

Some have inferred that I have this elitist view, and that I think only people who have been somehow “certified” have the right to comment on sports. It shouldn’t be confused with somehow being superior.

I would be among those that felt Costas is elitist.

Notice that he didn’t amend his statements, but still doesn’t want to be viewed as elitist. Bob can start by saying, “You don’t need to have a degree in journalism to opine on the Internets.”

If you opened up anything to large numbers of participants, you’d find some real gems in there. But you’d have a lot of muck to sift through.

Yes, there’s a lot of muck in the comments.

I do think newspapers’ comment boards need to have the same sort of standard they’d have for a letter to an editor.

Ah, there it is. Remember when I alluded to Costas’ next step being the need for comment Eugenics? Just about there.

I look at some baseball blogs, Baseball Prospectus and what-not.

+1 E-cred for reading BP.

[Deadspin] We think the tipoff for people being angry was the “basement” line. Everyone’s a little tired of that line. [Costas] Yes, well, that might have lapsed a bit into cliche.

Still no retraction, though.

Costas tried to manage the backlash and really just ended up saying a whole lot of nothing.