Jon Heyman gets lazy....

I don't generally expect a lot out of Jon Heyman. I generally don't really expect anything, other than the one hilariously ignorant article if/when somebody tries to talk about stats with him. But this is just straight-up laziness.

2. Mets: [T]hey'll hope Fernando Tatis and Daniel Murphy can form a viable platoon in left field and apparently also that Luis Castillo can spring to life (Jerry Manuel wisely is already making him feel better by saying he might get some leadoff at-bats)

Why is Luis Castillo getting leadoff at-bats? Why would this make him feel better? Why is making him feel better important? Why is Jerry Manuel wise to do this? There are so many unanswered questions here and it's sickening.

4. A's: Matt Holliday should transform their offense. Had they gotten Rafael Furcal, too, they'd also vie for the top spot on this list. In any case, it's nice to see them giving it a shot, even if their new win-now strategy almost seemed to change on a dime.

So, what did the A's do, other than get Matt Holliday, to deserve this high of a ranking?

Oh. That's it. Well, thanks for that non-analysis.

5. Diamondbacks: Jon Garland gives them a solid No. 3 starter in one of baseball's best rotations. If their young players emerge, most notably Justin Upton, they'll be dangerous, especially in that division.

Wrong. Jon Garland is in no way a #3 starter. #5 probably, #4 at best. The Diamondbacks added a mediocre innings-eater and lost Adam Dunn. What did they do this offseason to merit having a top-five rating of offseasons? I don't care about what could happen with Justin Upton. You're talking about what they did this offseason.

14. Reds: They lost out on Jermaine Dye, but Willy Taveras is the leadoff hitter they need. That young nucleus may be ready to win.

I was promised analysis of each team's offseason. This is not that. You list the Reds as a "winner" because they got Willy Taveras? I didn't even pay for this and I want my money back.

16. Tigers: Nobody underachieved like them last year. And while they didn't continue their spending spree this winter, a return to the mean by their key players would still put them in contention.

I see zero names of players here, and absolutely minimal analysis of the Tigers' offseason. If you're going to talk about how the Tigers' return to the mean could put them in contention, please explain who these players are at the absolute least.

25. Orioles: They got Nick Markakis on a long-term deal, but didn't get any new players to make anyone think there's light at the end of the Fort McHenry Tunnel.

Felix Pie? (Trading away Ramon Hernandez to make room for) Matt Wieters? Koji Uehara? All of these prove that there's light at the end of the Fort McHenry Tunnel. Please don't tell my you're that ignorant.

26. Marlins: Need to change their name to Florida Misers.

Thanks again for your deep, insightful, detailed, hard-hitting analysis of the Marlins' offseason.

29. Twins: Baseball's annual overachievers should never be doubted. Joe Crede could be on his way to fill a major need.

Why is this an "incomplete"? Because they haven't done anything you thought was important? That didn't stop you from ranking 28 other teams.

Jon Heyman, you disgust me. There's bad sportswriting, and then there's not making an effort, and then there's this.

I quoted an article at the beginning. So HA!

So I'm logging in to my Yahoo! email account, and I see the following under news: A-Rod reportedly tested positive for steroids. I think "hmmmm... interesting. I think I'll click on it and read more." So I click on it, read through, and come across this HiddenGem (one kabillion bonus points if you get the reference):

But a week before the Yankees open spring training, Rodriguez — certain to be dubbed "A-Roid" in the New York tabloids — faced more serious allegations after four sources told SI about his drug tests.

That got me thinking about just how many puns have been made based on the A-Rod nickname. Or should have been made.

LIST TIME!!!!!

Stray-Rod
Pay-Rod
May-Rod
Lightning-Rod
Good-Rod
Choke-Rod
Rod-Rod
Just O.K.-Rod
Bay-Rod
A-Fraud
Pay-Fraud
Cheat-Rod
Gay-Rod
Bad-Rod
A-Bad
A-God
Cry-Rod
Stay-Rod
Yay-Rod
Play-Rod
Gray-Rod
Pinstripe-Rod
NYY-Rod
Cash-Rod
Madonna-Rod
Money-Rod
Monay-Rod
May-Fraud
Weigh-Rod
Slay-Rod
Baby-Rod
Hey-Rod
Neigh-Rod
Jay-Rod
A-Rodgate
Distracting-Rod
Un-clutch-Rod
Overpaid-Rod
Tray-Rod
Ray-Rod
Day-Rod
A-Clod

All of them apply specifically to Alex Rodriguez. Except A-Rodgate. Which is what I'm predicting this whole steroids mess will come to be known as.

Wisdom often does not come with age. Senility, though...

“The days may come, the days may go, but still the hands of memory weave the blissful dreams of long ago.” — George Cooper, “Sweet Genevieve,” 1877.

Starting out with a song from over 125 years ago. Not a good sign. If I hadn’t already guessed by the fact that his name was Corky, I would know for sure by now that Corky Simpson is really old. And, as Furman Bisher has shown us, old people don’t always know best. Especially old people so old as to be senile.

You don’t have to swear to the truth of a song, you merely sit back and enjoy it. Baseball is that way. The heart of the sport is uniquely woven into the dreams of long ago.

Fuck the heck? “Swear to the truth”? Does that refer to, like, Pearl Jam’s Jeremy, which really did happen, or like Rage Against the Machine’s Sleep Now in the Fire, where Zack de la Rocha describes how he is going to singlehandedly tear down the capitalist society of the United States (which really has not happened yet, nor would I ever bet on it happening)? I guess the meaning is okay, but that first sentence makes no sense.

I’m not even going to try and tackle that last sentence.

You watch a superb athlete as he develops into a star, and you follow his career through its final innings.

And for those who weren’t born yet (luckily, Corkmaster Flash doesn’t have to count himself in this category), God (no) Al Gore (wrong) some nerd (try again) Tim Berners-Lee invented the Internet. And Bill James/The Hardball Times/Baseball Prospectus/Fangraphs created statistics that help us evaluate players we didn’t have the privilege of seeing.

Then you cheer again when he joins that pantheon of knights in knickers and is voted into the Hall of Fame.

I laughed at knights in knickers. Especially knickers.

Okay, so what’s the point? Let’s move on to Masta C’s picks for the Hall of Fame.

I’ve just completed my second ballot as a retired sports scribbler and lifetime honorary member of the Baseball Writers Association of America.

My choices this year are:

# Pitcher Bert Blyleven, who ranks fifth all-time in strikeouts and ninth in shutouts.

Excellent.

# Andre Dawson, outfielder, National League Most Valuable Player Award winner in 1987.

I personally disagree, but he has a case. Not going to argue too much. Although Cork Dawg didn’t exactly present a very persuasive case.

# Tommy John, who pitched for 26 seasons, second most in major league history, won 288 games and gave his name to a surgical technique for which he was a pioneer and after which he won the National League’s Comeback Player of the Year in 1976.

Disagree, but not awful. 26 seasons is a lot, and gives John a pretty decent case based on sheer longevity.

# Don Mattingly, who played 14 seasons, all with the New York Yankees and won nine Gold Glove Awards at first base.

Doesn’t exactly scream Hall of Fame to me. Remember that Internet thing I was telling you about? On it, people like to talk about why Don Mattingly shouldn’t be in the Hall of Fame. You should check it out sometime.

The main reasons thrown around regarding Mattingly’s candidacy are his short career (which De La Cork mentions as well, seemingly in his favor), and lack of production outside his shortish peak.

Mattingly is far from the worst of possible candidates, though.

# Tim Raines, a seven-time All-Star outfielder, 1986 National League batting champion and four-time base-stealing champ.

Again, not a compelling argument, but I agree with the choice.

# Jim Rice, who played 16 seasons, all with the Boston Red Sox. Rice was the 1978 American League Most Valuable Player, and he finished his career with a .298 lifetime batting average and 382 home runs.

See Andre Dawson (just scroll up). These are not Hall of Fame numbers, and one MVP is hardly a determining factor.

# Alan Trammell, who shares the major league record for most years by a shortstop (20) and played all those seasons with the Detroit Tigers. He was voted to six All-Star teams and was a member of the 1984 World Series champion Tigers.

Excellent choice. A better argument could be made, but this isn’t a bad start.

Oh, but Bill Dahlen says hi.

# Matt Williams, my first Hall of Fame vote for an Arizona Diamondback player. Matty played 17 seasons for the Giants, Indians and Diamondbacks. Nobody ever played the game with more intensity, nor with more reverence for the sport.

He was the inspirational leader of the 2001 World Series champion D’backs.

If Inspectah Cork wasn’t an Arizona sportswriter, I would totally be all over this choice. As it is, it’s a homer vote. I wish people would stop doing it, but it’s harmless. No huge problem from me, as long as Ghostface Corkah recognizes that nobody else should vote for Matt Williams.

Okay, that wasn’t so bad. No outrageous selections. He even voted for Raines, Trammell, and Blyleven. Why am I doing this again?

Of those I didn’t vote for but wish I could have, Mark McGwire tops the list.

One, two, seventeen, thirty-six, four hundred and twelve, negative fifty kabillion, zero, eight. He only voted for eight guys. The Notorious C.O.R.K. could have voted for two more if he wanted to.

So now I’m getting into semantics. This seems to be a waste of time.

Others honored with nomination this year and who may well be voted into the Hall of Fame, include Harold Baines, Jay Bell, David Cone, Ron Gant, Mark Grace,

*yawn*

Rickey Henderson,

Whaaaaaaaaaa? RICKEY HENDERSON? 2CORK DIDN’T VOTE FOR RICKEY HENDERSON?

Wait. I can’t be reading this right. Was that Dave Henderson? Rickey Clark? Is Corky-C going senile?

I really hope so. I really, really hope so. Otherwise, he should have his license revoked. (Actually, he should have his license revoked for using the phrase “knights in knickers”). There is no way Rickey Henderson – RICKEY HENDERSON -- belongs in the same category as Ron Gant. I can’t even fathom how anybody could possibly think that.

I am now going to jump off a cliff to make sure this isn’t a really bad dream.

Jack Morris, Dale Murphy, Jesse Orosco, Dave Parker, Dan Plesac, Lee smith, Greg Vaughn and Mo Vaughn.

Voters were limited to 10 choices.

There is no universally accepted definition of greatness in baseball, but all of the men nominated contributed enormously to the enjoyment of the game.

The hands of memory weave many blissful dreams of these boys of summer.

Just got out of the hospital. Nope, this wasn’t a dream. Ice Cork really did cast a ballot without Rickey Henderson. Unlike the time when I was in a band and I thought one of my groupies stole my guitar so I was running around looking for it because I couldn’t go onstage without it but it turned out to be my cousin who gave it back and I started playing but then I realized it was a dream. That one actually was a dream. Unfortunately. I really wish that one could’ve been real, and the one with MC Cork not voting for Rickey Henderson an actual dream. But maybe it’s better this way. Rickey got into the Hall of Fame anyway, and I can’t play guitar at all. That band would have sucked.

Still would’ve been cool to be in a band, though.

I'm rambling. And that was a Plaschkegraph. Time to stop.

I never would have guessed...

So the Cardinals just scored a TD in their game against the Panthers, with 2:43 left in the first quarter. The announcer (not sure who it was) took the opportunity to point out that that was the Cardinals' first TD in the first quarter in the Eastern time zone all season. I am not making this up. That is possibly the most unnecessary stat I've ever heard mentioned on a broadcast.

And they just scored again. And brought up the same point again.

Now there's a graphic on how the Cardinals haven't played well in the Eastern time zone, pointing out losses to the Eagles, Panthers, Giants, Patriots, and Jets. ALL THOSE TEAMS HAD BETTER RECORDS THAN THE CARDINALS. THE GAMES LOGICALLY SHOULD HAVE WORKED OUT HOW THEY DID. THE TIME ZONE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.

I'm almost expecting them to say that this would be the Cardinals' first win in the state of North Carolina this season.

P.S: Congratulations to Joe Flacco on being the first player to start at quarterback on a team that won two playoff games. They would probably have done just as well with Troy Smith.

Let's play a game...

The game is called "Is This A Good Criterion for Being In The Hall of Fame?". Now, we need a contestant.

Ah, Bruce Jenkins. Always one of FJM’s favorite targets. And I think he knew it. Look at this title for his article “explaining” his HoF ballot:

Stats? Go with gut when voting for Hall.

That’s something you couldn’t have gotten away with back in the salad days (which is a great song, by the way) of FJM. And just because FJM is gone, that doesn’t make it okay.

Let’s look at some of Jenkins’ picks, as well as his “rationale” for making these picks, and determine whether or not he's basing these picks on

Jim Rice: Rice might have been the most feared...

Being "the most feared": not a good criterion for being in the HoF.

Honestly, when I think of players that I would “fear”, I don’t think of this guy: http://digitalderek.typepad.com/sawxblog/photos/2008/offseason/january/jim_rice.jpg

I think of guys like these:

http://assets.espn.go.com/media/mlb/2000/1026/photo/a_darryl_i.jpg
http://www.foxnews.com/images/197104/4_22_gooden_dwight2.jpg
http://assets.espn.go.com/photo/2007/0815/mlb_a_offerman_275.jpg

Not Jim Rice.

He was a constant in the MVP voting, winning it in 1978

MVP voting: not a good criterion for being in the HoF.

Think about it. The same electorate that once made one choice, relying on that same choice to make another choice? That's like if there was a Hall of Fame for politicians, every US president would automatically have to be inducted. Even Benjamin "I Was Probably The Worst President of the 19th Century" Harrison, Herbert "I Was Probably the Worst President of the 20th Century" Hoover, and George W. "I Am By Default The Worst President of the 21st Century" Bush.

He fell just 16 votes shy of election last year

Failing to be inducted into the HoF: not a good criterion for being in the HoF

There is no Hall of Very Good. You're in or you're out. Using somebody's status as being out (even if they're close to being in) is not how you make the argument that they should be in.

and it's remarkable that he had four seasons of 200-plus hits.

Four 200-hit seasons: not a good criterion for being in the HoF

Bruce, you’re breaking your own rule here. 200 hits is a stat. And since you brought stats into the discussion, Michael Young has had FIVE seasons of 200-plus hits. Ha! Nobody’s “fearing” Michael Young, are they? No! Because he’s slightly above average with one exceptional season. Or, for short, a SAAWOES. If you’re a SAAWOES, you’re not a deserving HoFer. End of story. The two are mutually exclusive or something. Using 200 hit seasons to make a HoF argument is flawed, especially when a SAAWOES did it more times than the guy you’re trying to argue should be in the HoF.

Jack Morris: Defined the type of toughness lacking in so many starting pitchers today.

"Defining toughness": not a good criterion for being in the HoF.

If this was a reasonable argument, the Merriam-Webster dictionary would belong in the Hall of Fame.

He would have laughed at pitch counts, had they existed.

Laughing at pitch counts: not a good criteria for being in the HoF.

Example, scene one:

Giants fan: Hey Mr. Jack Morris, Tim Lincecum threw 131 pitches yesterday.
Jack Morris: HAHAHAHAHA!

Fuck the heck?

Big winner,

Getting credited with lots of wins: sort of a good criterion for being in the HoF.

Sort of in the sense that most pitchers from 1900 on who are credited with a lot of wins, not in the sense that these "wins" should be used as a criterion blah blah blah

who finished games (133 times)

Another stat. Bruce Jenkins, you're a hypocrite.

Complete games: not a great criterion for being in the HoF, but a decent secondary point.

Also, I'm showing Morris as having 175 CGs. FTH did 133 come from?

and was especially good in the postseason.

No, no he wasn't at all. A 3.80 ERA is not "especially good". If you want to be right, say "he pitched very well in three of his seven postseason series". That is less incorrect.

Also, pitching well in the postseason: a marginal at best criterion for being in the HoF.

I'd love to see a "no" voter try to look Morris in the eye.

"no" voters being thought to be unable to look candidate in the eye by "yes" voters: not a good criterion for being in the HoF.

What's that mythical creature that kills people by making eye contact with them? I can't remember the name, but I'm pretty sure it's not called a Jack Morris. So.... I doubt any "no" voter would suffer a lot of harm from looking Jack Morris in the eye.

Tim Raines: No. Did a lot of great things, but in every single category, he was a level down from Henderson.

Being at least as good as Rickey Henderson: not a good criterion for being in the HoF.

Rickey Henderson is, in the opinion of several esteemed baseball minds, a top 50 all-time player. How do you say Jim Rice, who doesn't even approach Henderson in any areas beyond home runs, belongs in the Hall when you use this logic to keep Raines out?

Bert Blyleven: If you were around at the time, following the game daily all season, you weren't likely to peg Blyleven for Cooperstown. Too many of his contemporaries had better reputations, and more presence. He did throw the best curveball of his day. But no.

Reputation: not a good criterion for being in the HoF.

Oh god. Reputation. I hate it when people use this as an argument. JUST BECAUSE PEOPLE THINK SOMETHING IS ONE WAY DOES NOT MAKE IT THAT WAY. The earth had a reputation for being flat. Then some guy found out it wasn't. Atlantis had a reputation for existing. Then people discovered it didn't. Bert Blyleven had a reputation for not being a HoF-caliber pitcher. Then people invented better stats and found out that the people who thought Blyleven didn't belong in the HoF were wrong.

FTH is "presence"? Let's call on baseball Hall of Famer the Merriam-Webster Dictionary to help us out.

Take it away, Merriam!

1: the fact or condition of being present

2 a: the part of space within one's immediate vicinity b: the neighborhood of one of superior especially royal rank

3archaic : company

4: one that is present: as a: the actual person or thing that is present b: something present of a visible or concrete nature

5 a: the bearing, carriage, or air of a person ; especially : stately or distinguished bearing b: a noteworthy quality of poise and effectiveness presence>

6: something (as a spirit) felt or believed to be present

1 and 4 are basically the same thing. I don't think Bert Blyleven existed less than Jack Morris. I think they existed exactly the same amount. Those two can't be right. I'm not sure how you can have more of 2, so that's out as well. 3 is archaic. No thanks. So unless we're using haunting places as HoF criteria now... it's got to be #5.

Presence: not a good criterion for being in the HoF.

Thanks to my good friend (and deserving Hall of Famer) the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, I can now say that the way a pitcher carries themself has no effect on how good they are (unless the way they carry themself affects their pitching). So: not a good criterion.

Mark Grace and Alan Trammell: Rock solid. Like granite. Just too much stiff competition at their respective positions. No.

I legitimately laughed out loud at this. Grace, fine. Trammell, though? Stiff competition from who? The only other shortstop you even mentioned in this "article" is Jay Bell, and you only mention him as a throwaway. You must be imagining things.

"Stiff competition" from imaginary players: not a good criterion for exclusion from the HoF.

Final tally:

1 sort of good criterion
1 decent secondary criterion
1 marginal at best criterion
10 bad criterions

Thank you, Bruce Jenkins, for being a contestant on "Is This A Good Criterion for Being In The Hall of Fame?" Unfortunately, you lost. Better luck next time. Actually, you'd be better off with better knowledge of what makes a good HoF argument. Here's a hint: don't use anything you did here.

BBWAA Finally Makes A Smart Decision

No, they didn't elect Bert Blyleven. But they did admit Will Carroll, Christina Kahrl, Rob Neyer, and Keith Law into their ranks. And thank goodness. I don't know much about Kahrl's work, but Carroll, Neyer, and Law are all excellent baseball writers who are far more well-versed in the game and its history than at least two-thirds of the previous BBWAA electorate. And I'd be willing to bet Kahrl would join the others.

So: thank you BBWAA, for making most of the right decisions in the awards balloting, and thank you for admitting four people who will raise the collective intelligence level.

5

From Jordan Bastian's blog:

Ricciardi said the Jays won't go five years on a new deal for Burnett -- not guaranteed or with any kind of option. Said Braunecker [Burnett's agent]: "I'm not going to say that eliminates them or anybody else. What I will tell you is, as I've maintained for the last two weeks, is if he wants five years, he's getting five years."

So... The Jays won't give him five and he won't take less than five.

Have faith Jays fans, your team is still in the running. JP Riccardi can apparently overcome the laws of logic.

We're still alive....

From the ESPN Winter Meetings blog, the worst pun I've seen all day:

Street hitting the road?

First of all, that's a pretty lame pun.

Second of all, that makes no sense. Streets don't travel (hit roads). If his name was Huston Trucker, then it would make sense. But hey, it's Steve Phillips. I've given up on expecting what he says/writes to be logical.

P.S: NO MORE RAMON HERNANDEZ IN BALTIMORE!