A #4, Super-Sized with a 2003 Cabernet, please

I never showed you all any pics from the wine bus I partooketh of a couple of weeks ago, so...

Here are the highlights. I absolve myself of any responsibility for any drunkeness that is displayed in the following pictures.


Yes, you too can be a Mac Daddy, if you get them drunk enough.


And God shall call the Grapes of Wrath upon thee!


Yes ma'am, I'll need to look very closely to make sure there aren't any lumps...


Cooler smoke has never been blown.


Trust me, I was a lot drunker than I looked here.


Hotties. No coldies.


Lucky Luis, puttin' down game to all the fly cuties, as usual.


Yes, more hotties. Wine bus trips tend to attract them by the twos, apparently.


Felix and Jay being cool and easy, and Ed...wait, what the heck IS Ed doing, anyway?


What, did you think we WOULDN'T play poker afterwards?

So there you have it. Some pictures have been left out to protect the innocent (or was that the intoxicated?).

Musings...

Well, that's out of the way, finally.

Now that Barry Bonds has hit his first home run of 2006, we here at O&B (all three of us: me, myself, and I) were wondering if people think that Bonds is currently on steroids.

Past juicing we'll gloss over, and assume that he was doing it for some length of time.

How 'bout now?

It'd be tantamount to an award for All-Time Stupidity if he was, I'm sure we'll all admit. And being that "stupid" has never been an adjective applied to Bonds in any print media I can remember, I'd like to put forward the assumption that he isn't currently juicing.

So, what happens if he hits another, say, 45 home runs this year?

Would we all assume, then, that he continued to use steroids in the face of drug testing? If he is tested and passes, would we assume that whatever steroid he was using is undetectable?

Lemme know what you think.

A little Dub-B-C

Well, that was an exciting game.

I will have to admit, the World Baseball Classic is making a valiant attempt to be just that -- a classic tournament of world baseball.

Before today, I've only been able to catch most of the game between Korea and China (which was a laugher), and there is an obvious divide between the haves and have-nots (winless in their first three games were South Africa, Australia, Panama, and China -- and Chinese Taipei's only win was vs. the most hapless China team).

But, all that aside, when you get down to the baseball being played between Canada, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Cuba, the United States, Puerto Rico, and the Domincan Republic (and Venezuela isn't bad, either), there really isn't a way around it -- it's good baseball.

The first game I watched in full was today's controversial victory by the United States over Japan, 4-3.

Firstly, the U.S. obviously should have been down at least one run. The botched tag-up call will loom large in the discussion around this game, and the fact that the game was played here in the U.S. will obviously spark some bad feelings in Japan (and probably other places with anti-U.S. sentiments).

However, I will say this -- the U.S. showed some moxie in this game after going down 3-0 early, with Chipper Jones and Derrick Lee connecting on big flies to bring them back even. The gap between talent levels has obviously been bridged, for the most part, between here and Japan.

I'm going to go ahead and watch the Puerto Rico/Dominican matchup tonight, and I'm expecting some good baseball there, too, as there's a bevy of major leaguers in that game. Interesting sidenote: the stadium capacity for this game was 20,000 -- that sold out the very 1st day. The attendance for the U.S./Japan game was 35,000 -- my estimate was that the crowd there was 30% Japanese.

Shocking...or, absolutely expected

There's been a book written that goes into detail about alleged steroid use by Barry Bonds from 1998, and for at least five years afterward.

Those who are paid to say things about these types of events are saying that it is now harder than ever for Bonds to deny steroid use (see Ken Rosenthal's response to the book).

Those who are not paid to say things about these types of events, like me, say...that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Why is it harder? Nothing has changed. It's simply another accusation, and it's not even really a new one -- the two gentleman who wrote the book are San Francisco Chronicle reporters. Yes, reporters of the same newspaper that leaked Bonds' grand jury testimony, and the same newspaper that has been finding bits of circumstantial evidence for years now.

So, again, why is it harder?

I suppose it could get even harder to deny if some guy from Idaho comes out and testifies that on April 28th, 2002, he saw Bonds using the cream and the clear while sucking on a lollipop and playing Super Mario Bros. on the Gameboy in downtown Sausalito. I mean, that's about as much new proof as this book provides, coming from the source that it does -- which, essentially, is the San Francicsco Chronicle.

The story will sweep the nation, just as it shouldn't. There isn't anything new here -- most of the nation believes he took steroids, so is this book supposed to make those people believe even more than they already do?

No, I bet that many think this book might sway people like myself, who suspect Bonds of steroid use, but simply refuse to raise allegations on something that I cannot verify for myself. And, furthermore, people who would rather see concrete proof (like say, a failed drug test or some DNA samples) before grabbing my torch and noose.

And now, Bonds will have 10 times the steroids questions and probes to deal with, though all those asking the questions and doing the probing should know that he'll keep denying it. He hasn't a choice, now, whether he's lying or not, so why ask? Why not wait for concrete proof, which I guarantee that gobs of people are working to get?

But no, instead we'll have this farce continue -- Bonds being tried in a court of public opinion that has already deemed him guilty, yet doesn't seem to get tired of "new" allegations and "proof" that Bonds has done something that most folks are sure he's done anyway.

The merry-go-round goes 'round, and we just keep hopping on thinking it'll take us somewhere new and interesting.

Mr. Rosenthal says he "can't wait" to hear what Bonds will say. Personally, I can't wait to hear people like Rosenthal say exactly what I know they'll say after they hear exactly what they should know Bonds will say. Nothing more entertaining than getting exactly what you think you'll get. It's the spice of life, I tell ya.

Sigh.

Wish me luck...

Got tickets to the Korn concert tonight in San Jose. Dunno if it's the best situation -- the other two bands playing are guys I've never heard of in Mudvein and 10 Years, but one can hope they aren't too bad (I hear Mudvein is pretty heavy, though).

This'll be back to back nights watching bands, as I and a few of my cohorts, Lucky Luis, Dave, and Craig were in Livermore watching Lavish Green rock out. Tried to mosh a little last night, but figured I had to conserve some energy for tonight.

Should I even be moshing at my age? I keep making this joke that upon trying to get into the moshpit, security's going to check my ID at the edge and say, "Aren't you a little old to be in the moshpit, sir? You might get hurt in there at your age."

It's kind of like Chris Rock said in Bigger and Blacker:

(paraphrasing) You don't wanna be the old guy at the club. You know who I'm talking about. He really ain't old, just a little too old to be in the club.

Ah, screw it. You only live once.

I'll get that Hennessey for you Wright away, sir. And some other clever phrase utilizing Correia.

Not knowing sucks.

Wouldn't we all like to know if Barry Bonds will stay healthy? Wouldn't be nice to know that Armando Benitez will pull his...considerable...weight this upcoming season? Wouldn't it be wonderful to know that Rogain worked?

...nevermind. I'm just fine with my shaved head.

In any case, we'd all like to know whether or not Brad Hennessey will be able to cut it as the Giants 5th starter in 2006, but that's difficult. The main thing that Hennessey's 2006 campaign showed is that we still don't know, even after 21 starts of data.

Personally, I'm optimistic he can at least match last season's production, and perhaps improve upon it to some degree -- I like that his stuff matches the kind of pitcher he is (his stuff isn't spectacular and is sometimes very hittable, but that fact that he's a groundball pitcher negates that some), and we cannot ignore that in 14 of his 21 starts, Hennessey was able to pitch into the seventh inning and beyond, with 12 of the 14 being at or near the "quality start" level. That's plenty good enough for a 5th starter.

Of course, he also had four starts where he didn't even make it past the 3rd inning, so...

This sounds like a situation ripe for the ol' insurance policy. But, should Hennessey fail or become injured, which insurance policy is better -- Kevin Correia or Jamey Wright?

Wright is a fairly known quantity, with the possiblity of being better than his statline reads.

Career: 5.13 ERA, 4.84 k's/9 (strikeouts per 9 innings), 1.07 k/bb ratio (strikeout to walk ratio), 1.92 g/f ratio (ground ball to fly ball ratio), .822 OPS against.

That...isn't good. A low strikeout rate, a poor strikeout to walk ratio, and a high OPS against indicative of a journeyman pitcher who's been released by five teams during his career. The two things in Wright's favor are: 1) his great groundball to flyball ratio, and 2) six of the 10 years he's pitched in the majors have been with the Rockies.

So, perhaps we'll give him a break. Let's slide on by those numbers pitching in Coors Field, and let's compile Wright's road numbers from the past two seasons:

4.52 ERA, 5.87 k's/9, 5.07 bb/9, 1.15 k/bb ratio (127.1 innings pitched over 2004 and 2005)

Well, there's more pitcher there, obviously, but those still aren't numbers to...Wright...home about (I can hear you groaning, but I choose to ignore you). With that, we'll throw up Correia:

Career: 4.86 ERA, 6.63 k's/9, 4.53 bb/9, 1.46 k/bb ratio, 0.80 g/f ratio, .863 OPS against.

Forgive me if I look at Correia as the better option. Correia, despite control problems last year, still walks less hitters over a nine-inning stretch than Wright's superior road numbers, and strikes out another batter and a half more per nine over Wright's road totals from the past two seasons. Correia's biggest problem seems to be keeping the ball inside the ballpark -- he gave up close to two homers per nine innings last season (1.85/9), but given the type of stuff he has, I think that's fixable.

In summary, while I don't think picking up Wright as an insurance policy was a bad idea, using him as anything but an insurance policy would be a mistake, in my mind. He hasn't shown a definitive ability to do anything particularly well in his career other than induce ground balls, and he hasn't shown that he's appreciably better than Hennessey or Correia. Long relief/spot starter is the role that best fits Wright.

Can I have change for a dollar? Yes, two 20's and a 10 would be fine...

In honor of pitcher's and catcher's reporting today, I went out and smelled some grass.

Take that how you will.

In other news, Randy Winn was selected to represent the U.S. in the World Baseball Classic. The article spends most of it's time talking about Winn's scorching September last year.

Hm. Could that be because the rest of Winn's career isn't all that much to look at, and that his selection shows how few choices they must have had? I mean, I like Winn, like his hustle, loved his couple of months with the Giants last year, and hope he repeats that performance in 2006, but...

World Baseball Classic? Randy Winn, representing the U.S.? There wasn't anyone better? But yeah, you gotta love that September of 2005 Winn had...boy, that was some September. Did you know he was Player of the Month in the NL last September?

I've had a few months before where I've helped out some people with counseling, loaning money, doing favors -- you name it, I was there for people.

Was I cheated out of my Nobel Peace Prize, or what?

I really shouldn't be that bothered by this, but I hate adding two and two and coming up with 516,238.

Take that how you will.

Happy Chinese New Year! Uh, Parade!

I'm working tomorrow, but I'll be able to almost witness something cool firsthand: the Chinese New Year Parade. It takes place in downtown San Francisco, going down Market Street and around Union Square where I work.

I say almost witness because I'm getting the heck out of there before the thing starts. I'd love to watch, but it's one of those things that I'd only feel like watching if I was off work on the day it took place and the day after. I'm wierd like that. And speaking of wierd...

...why is it that the darned parade takes place two weeks after the actual start of the Chinese New Year? It's been like this for a while, I'm told, but why? Wouldn't it be a little odd to you if you were invited to a party to celebrate New Year's on January 14th?

One good thing, though, is that it looks like this will be the first Chinese New Year parade in years that won't be rained on. Perhaps it is a good omen for those born in the Year of the Dog (I'm a Year of the Tiger guy, myself).

In any case, go on San Francisco...get your parade on.

Surfin', surfin', USA

Bear with me, folks.

I'm off work today, and I'm bored. This combination usually leads to things involving ladders, a rodent, old car batteries, and a parachute, but today I've decided to surf popular baseball sites for stuff...and of course pass on the surfin' goodness onto you all. Thank me later. Oh, and the better stuff is on the bottom, really...but bear with me, folks.

Phil Rogers has a fluff article on ESPN.com about which players he thinks is poised for a Derrick Lee-type breakout season. I guess it kills some time, reading this, but Rogers doesn't seem to provide lots of concrete reasons as to why he believes these particular players will break out, other than: a) He's good, and he's capable of being better, b) He's improved for a few years straight, and c) the time honored reason, "Just 'cuz". It's articles like these which make me believe, if only for a few, reality-suspended seconds, that I could be a professional writer. The article just has the feel of, "Oh, man, my deadline is coming up, and I gotta put together something."

Baseball Prospectus has the Week In Quotes article up, and as usual, there's some fun stuff in there. My favorite is a quote from Royals 1st baseman (and cool guy) Mike Sweeney, where he states, "From top to bottom, we’ve got a great lineup. Or at least a better lineup, definitely."

I'm thinking I would find it difficult to downshift from 5th gear to 2nd, but apparently Sweeney is more skilled than I.

Rich Draper over at the Official Giants Site (MLB.com) writes about the Giants outfield, managing to not tell us a single thing we didn't already know -- the season revolves around the health of Barry Bonds, and that there are also injury concerns for Moises Alou and Steve Finley. I'm gathering it's tough to write consistently interesting and informative stuff throughout the offseason.

Well, wasn't that fun? Wow, I can't wait to do that again. Now, onto the real stuff: blogs.

Grant at McCovey Chronicles has put up the most recent of his projection pieces, this one on Matt Cain. He notices Cain's fluky low hit rate, and I noticed the same about him last September in a comparison between him and Noah Lowry's first season:

Lowry, with a much larger sample size, had a higher strikeout rate and a lower walk rate, which are good signs. Cain is somehow doing a marvelous job of simply not allowing hits (to the tune of a .133 BABIP), but that is something which can't and won't last over the course of a full season. For perspective, the ERA leader in the NL, Roger Clemens, has a BABIP of .236.

See how cool that is? See how much cooler blogs are? See how much cool could a cool-chuck chuck if a cool-chuck could chuck cool?

John over at Give 'Em Some Stankeye (nice to see you writing again, John) doesn't eff around -- he tells us, straight up, he's just going to provide links to hot Jessica Alba pics, and baseball be damned. Well, for at least a day. Again, blogs cooler than other sites. We can do these types of things, whenever we please. For instance, just because I feel like it, I'm going to provide a link to a picture of Kate Beckinsale (Note: that used to be a link to a Kate Beckinsale pic, but the site I linked to yesterday that worked yesterday, apparently didn't work today and led to a site that tried to download a virus...I apologize profusely for this, but at the time I put the link up, it led to exactly what I said it led to -- a nice pic of Kate Beckinsale.)

Joe over at Giants Cove gives us a humourous account of why writing sucks. Yes, Joe, it does, when compared to say, sex, but otherwise it isn't too bad. Of course, this coming from a guy who writes better than I do anyway, but I'll forgive him his faults.

Alright, so there you go -- enough reading fodder to relieve the boredom of just about anyone...except me. I'm still bored.

99 most desirable women...well, kinda

AskMen.com has put up its list of the top 99 most desirable women.

...you know, this is just one of those lists that just begs to be argued against at various points, but I agree with their #1 pick -- Jessica Alba. The funny thing about these lists is, she was #78 last year...did she undergo some sort of genetic enhancement that I am as yet unaware of? If she's numero uno this year, that means she was #1 last year and they just ranked her incorrectly.

Number Two is a mystifying Sienna Miller. If you're going, "Sienna Who?", then you understand my mystification. She's not bad looking, sure (although not my type), but she: 1) isn't a bombshell by any means, 2) doesn't have a voluptuous body to make up for the lack of looks, and 3) is probably best known as Jude Law's fiancee (according to the site), who apparently didn't think she was all that hot himself because he's already had an affair before they've even gotten married. Great job there, fellas. Spot on with your number two pick -- she actually rose more ranks than Alba did, going from #86 to #2.

Just for perspective, good ol' Anna Kournikova is barely hanging on, coming in at No. 99. Did her last birthday bring her to 70 years old or something? No, she's 24, and she's also 187.564 times hotter than Sienna Miller, period, no matter how little or how much spotlight either of them get.

You know, there's a little more commentary that I would throw up on this, only the...uh, men... at AskMen.com are morons. The only way to surf their list if you, say, don't have all the rankings memorized, is one...by...one. There's no master list, no way to search out a particular name to find out a woman's respective ranking more quickly. You can skip 10 at a time, but it brings you to a particular woman's page (at ranking #10, 20, 30...you get the idea), and the other nine ranked women on the page are just the numbers representing the ranks -- no names attached, so you can see the number five for the fifth ranking, but you haven't any idea who it is unless you click on the link.

Sure, it keeps the drama bubbling for a second or two, but then it just becomes tedious. I went through the whole ranking once, kind of semi-noting my favorites (Eva Longoria, Salma Hayek, Leeann Tweeden, Kate Beckinsale), but when I go to write a word or three about the list, I find I'd have to randomly search around the ranking number that I think a particular woman was at to find the page again.

Great job at either being stupid, or being lazy.

We need backups for our backups

I've been pretty silent -- that is, absolutely silent -- on the issue of catching for the Giants in 2006 thus far. The reasoning is simple. If I dwell on it, I'll scream.

There are some roles on a team that I believe you can get away with having some dude in a uniform: backup 1st baseman, pinch-hitter, and 5th outfielder all come to mind. But backup catcher isn't one of them.

Brian Sabean's non-move in regards to filling this spot is a bit mystifying to me. After all, this is a guy who seems to love making moves, even ones that seem unneccesary. I was reminiscing the other day about Reggie Sanders, who had a solid season offensively and a good season defensively for the Giants in 2002 playing right field, but was not brought back in 2003. In comes Jose Cruz, Jr., who was palatable offensively and stellar defensively in 2003, but also was not brought back for 2004. The two-headed monster of Michael Tucker and Dustan Mohr handled the right field duties in 2004, and both were effective in their roles...but again, were let go before 2005.

By the time we get to Moises Alou, folks, that's four roster moves made where one would have sufficed (simply re-signing Sanders). Not exactly a model of efficiency.

Another example is Dustin Hermanson, Tim Worrell, and Joe Nathan. While Sabean has hung onto the likes of Jason Christiansen and Matt Herges, both of whom were mediocre at their best during their tenure with the club, Sabes sometimes treats good relievers like hot potatoes. Worrell, Hermanson, and Nathan were good enough to keep (Worrell and Nathan after the 2003 season, and Hermanson after the 2004 season), and all were better than others who were allowed to stick around.

While I do see that all three might have cost more money than Sabean was willing to spend, let's look at two moves that were made for 2005 and think; LaTroy Hawkins and Armando Benitez. Didn't have much problem taking on payroll there, did he?

Wouldn't it have been worlds easier to just pay those players (all three of whom probably would have made close to the same salary combined as Benitez makes by himself) than go through all of this musical reliever crap? Not even to mention Sabean is doing it again with Scott Eyre, letting him go in the exact same fashion as Worrell and Nathan -- right after their career years.

Sabes, you can trade relievers after their career years, because their value is at the highest and you'll get something in return. But just letting them go because you don't want to pay them money that you end up spending on other relievers anyway? Just doesn't make sense.

Sabean, to me, seems to believe that the only thing that validates his presence as General Manager is moving players in and out, fitting pieces to a puzzle that ends up making a picture strikingly similar to the puzzle he dismantled the year before.

So, why the complacency with backup catcher? While I don't agree with many of the things Sabean's done, the only stupid move he's made was Alex Sanchez (although that was stupid enough for three or four other stupid moves of the normal variety). I'm not about to think he's going to let Justin Knoedler be the backup for a 35-year old Mike Matheny all season long, is he?

Both Knoedler and Yamid Haad amassed negative VORP's last year (Value Over Replacement Player), but I can see how one might pass over Knoedler's numbers given that he only had 10 at-bats to show anything.

But riddle me this -- if the organization believed Haad was the #1 guy behind Yorvit Torrealba, and believed it enough that they were willing to send Torry on his way and bring Haad in, what do they project for Knoedler after their #1 guy was so horrible? No, Knoedler cannot be any worse, true, but...

...is this over-confidence in Knoedler, or over-confidence in Mike Matheny's ability to play the vast majority of the season at a high level?

I think it's the latter, and I cannot help but think there's a very good chance that this could easily hurt the Giants in 2006. We all should already know that Matheny's offensive output last year was above his normal levels (and, by the way, notice how those numbers came back to the mean by the end of the season?), and there is. not. any. way. that. he. will. hit. for. that. high. of. an. average. with. runners. in. scoring. position. again.

So, anybody with some sense should realize the only direction for Matheny's offensive production to go is down, especially given his age of 35. Which brings us to another point -- games played. Matheny played 134 games last year, and a la Benito Santiago, saw his offensive numbers fall deeper into the season when his legs were no longer fresh. Does Sabes now propose to have Matheny play more games next season after seeing this phenomenon of old catchers getting tired late in the season for four of the last five seasons?

I guess that's the case, because otherwise he's trying to say that Knoedler can start about 30 games next year and be productive -- and that's 30 games if the 35 year-old catcher they currently have doesn't get hurt.

Seems an incredible stretch of common sense to me.

UPDATE: Thanks to Adam for this update, which apparently just happened a bit after I made this entry -- Todd Greene has signed a minor-league contract with the Giants within the last hour or two. Greene is 34, and has had some decent offensive production at times, although notably his best offensive years have been with the Rockies and Rangers, respectively.

Things make a lot more sense now than they did...oh, about three hours ago. Greene seems capable enough for a backup role, although officially he's to compete for the job.

Speaking of Mays Field...

Good ol' Aneel over at Trapped in L.A. urges us to sign the petition started by the folks at MaysField.org, which happened to be such a good idea that I not only signed the petition, but then put up a large link on that thar sidebar for all of you all to click on and sign as well.

The petition goes as follows:

While we wholeheartedly support the sponsorship and financial commitment SBC/AT&T has provided to the San Francisco Giants, we believe the time has come to honor one of the most beloved ball players of all time whose name has been synonymous with the San Francisco Giants franchise for nearly half a century.

We propose re-branding SBC Park as “Willie Mays Field at AT&T Park” effective immediately.

This new name will continually remind the rest of the world of our rich baseball heritage and honor possibly the greatest player in baseball history. At the same time, the new name provides stability and class for one of the most beautiful ball parks in the nation and allows SBC/AT&T to continue their sponsorship while increasing their visibility. For this reason we believe this is a win-win situation for the San Francisco Giants, Major League Baseball, its fans, and the new combined SBC/AT&T Company.

I couldn't have said it better myself, which is why I didn't say it myself, opting instead to let the much more eloquent (and much less lazy) Mays Field peoples take care of things for me. They're so nice that way...

So, why are you still reading this? Go. Sign. Makes so much sense that even George W. could grasp the concept (ba dump! crash!).

I saw the sign...

AT&T Park, eh?

...

..............

....................... .. . ... ......... .. ...

I agree with Lefty. Whatever.

Mays Field.

Steve Finley vs. Jason Ellison

Here we go again.

Last year after the Giants acquired Randy Winn from the Seattle Mariners at the end of July, I was a little peeved.

Brian Sabean had traded away a good backup catcher and a younger, although questionable, pitcher in Yorvit Torrealba and Jesse Foppert to get an outfielder whose statistics were hardly better than the outfielders that had been playing to that point...and added a few million to the Giants payroll in the process. It wasn't that the Giants didn't need outfield help -- it was difficult to believe that Jason Ellison was the answer in CF, no matter how much effort the guy put out. So yes, help was needed, but Winn's statistical pedigree suggested he would have minimal impact.

Instead, Winn came in and posted a 1.071 OPS over 231 at-bats during August and September, was the sparkplug for just about all of the offense that the Giants managed to scrape together for those two months, and played a decent centerfield despite having a history of playing a questionable centerfield and playing one of the most difficult centerfields in all of the majors.

Yeah, well see, that would've been my 2nd guess.

The situation the Giants have created for themselves this offseason by picking up Steve Finley for Edgardo Alfonzo in the Trade of the Unwanteds has quite a few striking similarities to Winn's acquisition.

For one, the writing is again on the wall for Ellison. Last year, the writing said, "You're not good enough to start in our outfield", which wasn't a bad thing -- I loved the guy's hustle and effort, and he came out of the gate strong last year when the Giants were figuring out that Marquis Grissom wouldn't do them any good anymore, but he isn't a starting centerfielder, to be sure. Now, though, the writing says, "You're not good enough to be our 4th outfielder". Is that true?

(sigh) Yes, it is, but only if you have a better option. Is Finley a better option? Yes, no, maybe.

Stats are tough to compare for these two, because of two extreme circumstances for both players: Ellison has really only half a season's worth of big league at-bats to speak to what kind of numbers he's capable of putting up, and while Finley has a host of statistical data to analyze, he'll be 41 years of age by the time the 2006 season begins. But I'm a glutton for futile efforts, so...

Ellison: 352 at-bats, .264/.316/.361, 24 BB/44 SO (.55 bb/k ratio), 14 steals in 20 chances, 3.10 p/pa (pitches per plate appearance...say that 10 times fast), 1.67 g/f ratio (ground ball to fly ball)

Finley: 406 at-bats, .222/.271/.374, 26 BB/71 SO (.37 bb/k ratio), 8 steals in 12 chances, 3.84 p/pa, 0.92 g/f ratio

I would throw in Todd Linden, too, but my oracle told me that Dan Ortmeier and Adam Shabala have a better shot to make the team than Linden. Linden's career path seems destined to follow that of Pedro Feliz. He'll get a real shot when he's about 29 years old.

I won't bother with any career analysis for either Ellison or Finley, because it seems irrelevant. Ellison's inexperience and Finley's advanced age dictate we take things one year at a time.

But how does that one year comparison look? Horrible, really. Both players were terrible, but Finley costs a lot more to be terrible. Ellison strikes out at a lower rate (one per eight AB's, while Finley is at one per every 5.7 AB's), but doesn't do anything else significantly better. Finley sees almost a full pitch more in a plate appearance than Elly on average, which is good, and also has a much more palatable g/f ratio. He also has a much better ISO power number than Elly (152 vs. 97). Stolen base % and their walk rates are even enough to call it a wash.

Defensively, Finley has the edge if one look at Range Factor and Zone Ratings, which I really don't -- Finley Range Factor is much better then Elly at 2.72 to 2.00. But Finley also had a better fielding percentage, which is something I do glance at: .985 to .974.

What does this all boil down to? Finley, statistically, was a slightly worse player than Ellison last year, but they were both poor enough that it hardly matters. It really comes down to whether one believes Finley's age caught up with him last year and he's incapable of performing significantly better, or that he's got another year left in him to put up numbers that at least approach his 2003/2004 seasons with Arizona. One could also muse as to whether or not Ellison is talented enough to improve, but since we all know that Finley will be the only one to get enough plate appearances to show anything good or bad, it's a moot point.

In any case, it doesn't look good. Recalling a few other names of outfielders still playing at 40 doesn't exactly inspire confidence: Willie Mays, Rickey Henderson, B.J. Surhoff, Jose Cruz, Barry Bonds (oh, wait, nevermind that one). Heck, the Giants can do an in-depth study on the aging process of older outfielders all by themselves -- Grissom broke down a little shy of 40, while Moises Alou is almost there. I suppose it's hard not to believe Finley might have a little gas left in his tank with the 40-ish examples of Bonds and Alou right in front of you.

Life as a Moron must be difficult...

I've been a moron on several occasions throughout the span of my life. Doubtless I will stray into that unique level of incompetence again, and probably within the next hour or so.

I do, however, strenuously avoid being a career moron. A lifer. Gene Wojciechowski apparently doesn't share the same level of concern as I do.

He threw out an article here explaining the finer points of why he would not let either Mark McGwire or Sammy Sosa into the Hall of Fame.

Not a new argument, to be sure, and this article breaks absolutely no new ground in the discussions surrounding any of the convicted/suspected steroids users from the last 10 years or so. So, why read it? Because it's great fun to see people hang themselves with their own rope.

This is the part that really got me:

There are hitters in the Hall of Fame who likely used corked bats on occasion to add to their numbers. There are pitchers in the Hall of Fame who almost certainly loaded up the ball once or twice (or more) during their careers. But prescription baseball is a level of cheating so obscene, so arrogant in nature (and yet, conveniently ignored by MLB and the players union during glorious 1998), that it prompted a congressional hearing.

So, Mr. Wojciechowski is perfectly fine knowing there are other players in the Hall who cheated in other ways to unknown effect, yet draws the line at McGwire's and Sosa's potential drug use. Cheating is okay as long as you use guile, but not with drugs.

Excuse me. What the fuck?

This line of reasoning is so asinine I literally shudder to think there may be others who think this way. Truly, cheating is a black and white thing. Cheating bad, not cheating good. I don't care the form, and neither should he. Cheating is morally reprehensible, period, but now the steroid jargon has gotten so out of control that we have people saying that corking a bat to hit better or scuffing up a ball to gain an unfair advantage isn't THAT bad when compared to drug use...drug use that, by the way, wasn't even banned.

I refer to something I wrote in the infancy of this blog right about a year ago -- while steroid use is wrong and should be banned, and punishments for breaking that ban should be harsh, is it really that different than what us working shmucks do every day to get by?

Energy drinks. Coffee. Pain pills. We put things into our bodies everyday that just aren't meant to be there, and four out of five times we're doing it in a work-related capacity. Feel better, more alert, have more energy, all in an effort to perform at a higher capacity than we would have had we not ingested any taurine, caffeine, or B-12.

It seems to all be a matter of degree for Mr. Wojciechowski. Drug use is such a large commitment with such far-reaching effects that it apparently crosses a line with him, while marking a baseball to make it move in ways it wouldn't normally is a small, one-time commitment. Nevermind that anyone using drugs ~still has to work extremely hard to net anything positive from the drug use~, while a guy who scuffs a baseball doesn't have to do a damned thing except find something with a rough surface, hide it in his glove, and rub the baseball for a few seconds.

Sure. That makes sense. Let's be glad Mr. Wojciechowski doesn't have a vote for the Hall, and let's hope he never gets one. Besides, he's too busy being a moron, and that's a difficult thing to maintain on a daily basis.

Happy New Year!

If you think you detect a note of sarcasm in my writing the title of this entry 11 days after the actual event took place, you are wrong. You do not detect a note of sarcasm...

...say, rather, you detect a symphony of sarcasm.

The Forces of Darkness (to be referred to hereafter as, "work") are about to find their efforts to keep me from writing thoroughly thwarted (and yes, thoroughly is a completely useless adjective when used with a word like thwarted, because something cannot be thwarted by degrees -- it either is thwarted, or it isn't. But I don't care, really. I'm finally writing something again. So there. I'm even breaking an unwritten grammar rule by taking entirely too long to close off these parenthesis and get on with the entry. But again, care, me, don't.)

I haven't the slightest clue as to what's going on with the Giants, or sports in general, save that my prediction of a Carolina Panthers/New England Patriots Superbowl matchup is looking pretty good at the moment.

Well, that isn't totally true. I hear the San Diego Padres have signed Shawn Estes (insert laughing synonym here), and that the Giants are interested in Josh Fogg. Usually I'd jump for joy hearing that the Giants are interested in a pitcher like Fogg...at least, I would until I realized that Fogg isn't any good...which, honestly, I did as soon as I read the blurb, thereby curtailing any possibility of the aforementioned jumping for joy. Ahem.

Note to Brian Sabean: Sabes, really, it's okay to let Brad Hennessey and Kevin Correia battle it out for the 5th spot in the rotation. Hennessey has the singular distinctive ability to become a totally non-descript pitcher -- which is what 5th starters usually are. He'll also make league minimum next year, something Fogg won't do to be just as poor/mediocre as Hennessey will be. At least we've seen a number of quality starts out of Hennessey -- bringing in somebody like Fogg would be absolutely superfluous.

Correia has the possibility of developing into...er, something other than a starting pitcher, I think. He never shows the "flash" often enough; that combination of control, velocity, and stuff that people seem to think he's capable of if given a chance to pitch regularly. I doubt it, personally, but I don't think there'd be much harm in letting Correia have the 5th spot if Hennessey can't seem to cut it, because I think there's a good enough chance Kevin could show that "flash" about once every three or four starts, which'd be good enough for a 5th spot in a rotation.

So no, Sabes, while a pitcher named Fogg pitching in a place like San Francisco would reap untold amounts of cool points for the franchise, there isn't any reason to bring the guy in.

Oh, and J.T. Snow signed with the Red Sox. Doesn't that just fit? They got Doug Meintkiewicz (did I just spell that guy's name right on the fly?), who is the poor man's J.T. -- no power, all glove, lefty hitting 1st baseman -- but perhaps felt cheated after he played fairly crappy for them during his short tenure there, only to grab the last out ball from their historic World Series win 2 years ago and fight with them for it. J.T., of course, is the real deal No-Power-All-Glove-Lefty-Hitting-First-Baseman, so I'm sure the Red Sox's NPAGLHFB fetish is satisfied, and of course Snow will give any World Series last out ball back to the team and the city, because that's the kind of guy he is. J.T.'s got more class than a prep school.

Anyways, I should be bulking up the entries now that I actually have two days off in a week, and of course Spring Training is sneaking up on us like a naked ninja wearing socks (which would mean he wasn't really naked, but nevermind).

Yeah, that'd be about right...

So, Brian Sabean managed to find a way to dump Edgardo Alfonzo, not save any money by doing so, and managed to make the team older, all in one fell swoop?

Yeah, that'd be about right.

I like saying "Steve Finley, 4th outfielder" about as much as I like saying, "Edgardo Alfonzo, 3rd baseman". Which is to say, not at all. But oddly enough, I feel better. I mean, if Sabes wants to pay his 4th outfielder more than his starting centerfielder and his starting right fielder, more power to the guy.

Hey, does anyone think that he even looks at any free agents under the age of 30? Sorry, rhetorical question.

It'll take me a bit to digest all this, at which point I'll try to address the issue of whether or not the Giants are significantly better with all the moves they've made this offseason. Offhand I think they're better, but significantly better is the part that worries me. I mean, if you just put the names side by side...

Brett Tomko/Matt Morris
Scott Eyre/Tim Worrell
LaTroy Hawkins/Steve Kline
Edgardo Alfonzo/Steve Finley
J.T. Snow/Mark Sweeney

Let's really think about that. If you want to say the names on the right constitute a significant upgrade, I'm fine with that -- but I'll talk about you behind the front of your back when you're not looking in a mirror. Or something.

Hm. That list is just beggin' for some good ol' fashioned new-fangled statistical a-nalysis, which I just ain't got the time to do at the moment. But, I'm guessing if y'all didn't feel like waiting, you could mosey on over to that thar sidebar and find some folks who might have an extra minute or three to have done it.

Otherwise, gimme 7-10 business days.

Egads, that's a lot of money

I suppose I could make an attempt at a quasi-gloat, seeing as how the Giants signed the exact pitcher that I was thinking they would and should back in October.

Instead, I'll go for a wince. Of consternation. And a little hand-wringing, too.

Three years is the length of the contract given to former St. Louis Cardinals starter Matt Morris, which is a length I fully expected.

Twenty-seven million dollars is the value of the guaranteed portion of the contract given to Mr. Morris, which is a number I would've thought possible over a three-year span, but also would've thought silly.

I wanted Morris in the starting rotation, but methinks that salary figure is just too much. Did the Giants and Brian Sabean have much choice? Probably not, but we've seen how much Sabean covets proven veterans, "winners", and their ilk. He simply overpays veterans whenever possible, although whether that's because of a lack of negotiating skills, market pressures, or other circumstances is beyond my feeble ability to ascertain.

But while Morris was the "best of the rest" of the starters on the market not named Kevin Millwood or A.J. Burnett (which reminds me...Toronto!? What the heck is Burnett doing going to...nevermind), he just isn't worth nine million per year. His contract is valued at about three and a half times the annual salary Brett Tomko made last season, yet Morris isn't anywhere close to three and a half times as good. Better, yes, but is he going to give the Giants an extra 6.5 million worth of pitching over Tomko? No, not unless he duplicates his 2001 Cy Young, which saw him run up 7.7 k's per nine innings, a 2.01 g/f ratio, and a .685 OPS against, all of which are fantastic numbers, and none of which are numbers he came close to duplicating in his last two seasons pitched.

But, will he help? Yes, I don't think there's much doubt he adds stability to the rotation, which could run into potential issues with the youth and inexperience of Noah Lowry and Matt Cain, a possible skills decline in Jason Schmidt, and a fifth spot that has yet to be determined. I can see Morris being a rock of consistency in the rotation at the third spot. I can also see him experiencing a bit of a resurgence in SBC/Mays Field, as the left-handed lineups many opposing managers will throw at him should have trouble taking him deep -- most of Morris' pitching history has seen him give up few long balls (with the notable exception of 2004), and with him now in a park that kills most left-handed hitters chances of hitting home runs, I expect to see him continue that habit.

Interesting to note that as the Giants part ways with J.T. Snow and his Gold-Glove defense at 1st base, they bring in a pitcher who will end up having a lot of ground balls head to the right side of the infield. Not to say this was a good enough reason to bring Snow back, but...well, the platoon combo of Lance Niekro and Mark Sweeney had better hit enough to make up for the loss in defense, at the least.

So, with this large contract done, one can't help but think the Giants are all but done making any kind of major changes in their roster. I'm assuming they don't really have any money left after signing Morris, so big names are out. I'm expecting perhaps one more relief pitcher's name to pop up (who I'm assuming will be over 35 years old), and a 4th outfielder of some sort. I don't rule out another starter to take the 5th spot, but I tend to think that the job will end up falling to Brad Hennessey in some way, shape or form.

Take care, all.

Busy, not dead

Working six days a week sucks. Another ground-breaking revelation I've had is that it is very dark at night.

Wisdom just oozes from my very pores, I tell you.

My new job is going fine, but the commute I've picked up along with it is free-time prohibitive, to say the least. My eight-to-ten hour workdays have been puncuated on either end by an hour and a half worth of travel by truck, bus, and BART train (and about two blocks worth of walking, too).

Working in downtown San Francisco has its perks and is a nice experience, but I cannot wait until January when I will be working in a different location. If my commute was something like 30 minutes each way, I'd be fine with it. As it stands now...

...yech.

All of this means, of course, that the precious little free time I've had has not been spent here or on my Warriors site (which was a decent enough idea, but ended up being poorly timed). But, not gone, and not considering stopping writing, but I am for all intents and purposes simply too busy at the moment to do more than one entry per week.

So for those who still are visiting, thanks, and bear with me through the next month or so.

The Biggest, Little Boring City in the World

Reno. Boring.

Was there for four days, and the most exciting time I spent up there was the time training for my new job -- looking at instructional videos, taking little mini-quizzes on the training modules I studied, and getting to know some of the products we sell.

What about gambling, you ask? Well, I gamble down here enough, thanks. Slots have always bored me to tears, and I've never been into roulette, craps, Pai Gow, Let it Ride, Keno, etc., etc., etc.

Of course, being pretty much broke could have influenced my feelings about gambling on this little trip. I would've at least played some blackjack, but I know better than that.

No, just waking up, going to work/training, eating lunch, finishing work/training, going back to the hotel, eating dinner, and going back to the room to read a book or study.

In any case, that's a large part of the reason posting has been non-existent this past week, so hopefully that ought to change a bit in the next day or three. I'll throw in my two cents on Ned Colletti's hiring by the Dodgers in a couple/few days, although I will tell you that his defection doesn't exactly evoke strong emotions in me on way or another.

'Til then...

Cover the eyes of the children...

This can't be anything but bad news.

Tino Martinez is a free agent, and the sinking in my gut is paralleling Martinez' rise to the top of the Giants free agent 1st baseman list, I think.

Hey, you might call guessing, but I call it divination.

He's hits lefty. He has some power. He won't be expensive. He's old. He's won World Championships. He's from New York.

He's a veteran. He's savvy. He's salty. He's crafty. He's handsome. He was a Yankee.

And there is no way on God's green Earth that you could convince me that Brian Sabean won't covet him on some level.

Don't get me wrong -- it wouldn't be the worst move Sabean could make. If Martinez was guaranteed to put out the same production as last season (.249/.328/.439 with 17 homers, 49 RBI in 303 at-bats) in a platoon role with Lance Neikro, then I really don't think it'd be too bad. I'd rather have those Tampa Bay numbers from 2004, but then, I'd also like to win the lottery, too.

But he is 37, going on 38 within a month. While I realize Sabean has faith in the Fountain of Youth that has apparently been renamed McCovey Cove, I don't share the same faith, and I bite my nails whenever he signs anyone north of 35 years old.

(sigh) As long as he was cheap, I guess. Oh, yes, cheap. Think baby chickens. Cheap. The Yanks declined a three million dollar option they had on Tino, and the Giants should decline to pay him that much, too.

Two million, do I hear two? Sold! To the native East Coaster with the perpetual goatee!

You heard it here first, never forget.

Feedback

For all of you that visit regularly, let me know what you think of the tweaks I made in the coloring scheme today -- trying to make this site a bit more "Orange & Black" than it was before. Finally hunted down a graphic illustration of HTML color codes, and I promptly put it to use.

Oh, and it's very nice being right. The Cubs and Neifi Perez agreed on a two-year, five million dollar deal on Tuesday, proving that every now and then, I'm spot-on (I made note of the timing of Neifi's improved play earlier this year -- just as opportunity presents itself, Neifi starts playing better ball until he hits a payday and is exposed). Neifi's pattern of pay-and-play is eerie. Let's follow along:

• Starts in Colorado, where he seemingly hits well in a big-time hitter's park. Before the year of his highest yearly salary to that point (4.1 million), he's traded to the Royals, who played in a pitcher's park. Neifi sucked, his numbers dropped, and he was waived.
• Picked up off waivers by the Giants, Neifi put up some decent offensive numbers (at least, for him) for a while right as Rich Aurilia was going through some injury troubles and the Giants had no real 2nd baseman. Nevermind that his numbers didn't end up good at all -- he had made himself useful and started off hot with the bat, impressing Giants GM Brian Sabean enough to...
• Give Neifi more money. Going from a four-year low of 1.5 million in 2003, Neifi parlayed his spurt of hitting and usefullness into a one-year, 2.75 million dollar deal. After almost doubling his salary, Neifi sucked, his numbers dropped, and he was released.
• Picked up as a free agent by the Cubs, Neifi put some decent offensive numbers (at least, for him) at the end of 2004 and for a while in 2005 right after Nomar Garciaparra was going through injury troubles and the Cubs had no real SS. Nevermind that his numbers didn't end up good at all -- he had made himself useful and started off hot with the bat, impressing Cubs GM Jim Hendry enough to...
• Give Neifi more money. Going from a six-year low of one million in 2005, Neifi parlayed his spurt of hitting and usefullness into a two-year, five million dollar deal. After more than doubling his salary...is there an echo in here?
• (we'll leave this bullet-point for 2006)

But, c'mon folks. Isn't that...eerie? The guy keeps saving himself by hitting a little at the exact right times -- when his new team needs it most. He hits a bit, makes himself useful defensively, and gets a raise, after which his promptly starts sucking again.

And the Cubs fell for it.

Breaking Barriers

Wow. To say this shocks me is an understatement.

The Los Angeles Dodgers interviewed their first candidate for the vacant GM position yesterday. Let's break down some facts about this candidate, along with my shock level:

1. The candidate isn't White. (shock level of 5.1)
2. The candidate is Vietnamese. (shock level of 7.9)
3. The candidate is a woman. (shock level of 12...must...release...pressure...argh!)

The story behind Kim Ng's interview is here, and you'd better believe it's required reading. There will be a quiz later.

None of those three points above should be taken to mean I am against any of those three things in a MLB GM. Far from it. They are simply to illustrate my utter and complete surprise that all three of those things were true about one candidate at the same time.

It isn't as if she's come out of the blue -- she was Vice President and Assistant General Manager of the Yankees from 1998-2001, apparently, although this tidbit of interesting information must have somehow slipped by my network of informants. I've never heard of her before yesterday.

All of this causes me to root against her ever so slightly, however. Why? Because if she gets the job, I'll find it extremely difficult to root against her. I would want her to succeed. Thus, she can't get this job, but another one would be just fine and dandy -- outside of the NL West, please. This is the Dodgers we're talking about, you know. Wishing for the success of their GM would pose philosophical and moral conflicts within my being that I would be hard-pressed to overcome without risking my sanity.

At this time, the realist in me cannot see this as more than a PR move on the part of the Dodgers, what with bigger, more experienced names out there. However, the fact that she has been interviewed could be a gateway further down the line for either her or another woman to try for this type of position. It's only a single drop of water in the lake, but the ripple-effect is going to reach out and affect other things -- at least, one would hope.

Good job, Miss Ng.

Update: For those who might wonder what Miss Ng looks like, as well as wondering if there are other women in the pipeline to possibly become a GM down the road, go to this article, which was written at the time of Ng's hiring in Los Angeles. I now know there are two other women could become candidates in the near future.

Eye Candy

It's illegal in about 45 states to look this good.

Since I'm spending most of my blog-time currently over at my other site, Way of the Warriors, I'm obviously not spending as much time here.

But I don't want to neglect this site, so...Jessica Alba. Jessica Alba looking good. Enjoy!

I like gooooooooooollllllllllld!!!

Mike Matheny and Omar Vizquel are, once again, Goldmembers.

Wait a minute, that didn't sound right...

Up and Running

Alright, for all those who are ready for the Warriors Opener tonight against the Atlanta Hawks, you can read a bit of commentary by yours truly on the team and specifically, on the new contract of forward Mike Dunleavy that was signed on Halloween.

Check it out, Way of the Warriors is another place I'll be doing some sports writing. And since it's brand new, please feel free to use the comments section to let me know what you think about how it looks -- and, of course, any comments about anything I've written. I've put up direct links to player stat pages for a little extra convenience, and plan to eventually link to all mainstream Warriors info, so that after reading an article there you can jump to any point to delve further into the team or check on something Warriors-related.

See ya there!

Generally Managing to screw up

Something that a couple of other bloggers have touched on was the recent firing of Dodgers' GM Paul DePodesta. I made no comment because...well, they beat me to the punch. By a week.

But I did not know about Red Sox GM Theo Epstein resigning.

I'll touch on the former first. Firing a GM nowadays can't be seen as that big of a deal, especially after losing 90 or so games in a season. But this is the epitome of not only impatience, but has a hint of betrayal, too. What owner hires a guy, watches the guy build a division winner, then fires him after the very next season, disappointing as it may have been?

Sure, DePo made a lot of acquisitions that may have been head scratchers. But the Dodgers poor play this past season was not simply a function of having the wrong team -- rather, it was a function of not having the team DePodesta put together on the field together for long enough. Consider:

• J.D. Drew playing all of 72 games. Now, Drew's durability is something many of us (including myself) wondered about, but as far as the player himself goes, Drew put up the numbers he was supposed to. But it's hard to overcome the team's best overall hitter missing 80 games, right? Giants fans know a skoche about missing their best hitter for a while.
• Milton Bradley missing most of the season. Another player that was hitting well, but could do it for enough games to help the ballclub. Behind Drew and Jeff Kent, Bradley was the next best hitter -- and he missed about as many games as Drew did.
• Cezar Izturis missing time. While I'm not about to say this was a season-changing occurence in any way, Izturis too missed a large chunk of the season, and I'm sure that wasn't in DePodesta's plan.
• Eric Gagne making 14 appearances. I mean, are you starting to get the picture? While I'm not one of those who says a closer can make or break an entire season, Gagne is one of the best relievers around, period, and is one of the few who actually makes a significant contribution in terms of wins out of the bullpen. Well, at least he could've, if he was healthy.
• Odalis Perez both being injured and regressing. He missed 10+ starts, and wasn't the same pitcher as last season.

I could go on, but isn't that enough? While nary a tear has ever been shed by yours truly on behalf of the Dodgers, I'll give the DePodesta situation a confused headshake. One year removed from a division title, and with all of those huge injuries from their top players to contend with, there simply is no way he should've been fired. Couple this move with the firing of manager Jim Tracy only a couple weeks earlier, and there isn't any doubt that man at the helm of the Dodgers, owner Frank McCourt, has decided that he'd rather have the winds of fate guide his team than anyone with a plan. For any of us who've ever thought Giants ownership was poor in this or that situation, heh, complain no longer. At least we don't have that guy.

Epstein's situation is baffling as well. He walked away himself one year removed from putting together the team that won the World Series, and after a season that saw them reach the postseason to defend their title. Why?

Epstein and the Red Sox were in the middle of negotiations for a contract extension, apparently, but due to negotiation problems and other issues between the Red Sox front office and Epstein, couldn't come to an agreement.

I can't help but think that this is not only bad news for the Red Sox, but very bad timing, as well. They've got some flaws on their team to fix, a new trade-me-now rumour going around about Manny Ramirez, and now they're without a man to spearhead the efforts to solve those problems right as the offseason is starting to kick into gear.

The former Red Sox GM won't have the slightest of problems finding a new gig, I'm sure. Even if he doesn't take a job this season, I think it likely there will be another two or three vacant GM spots after the 2006 season.

Let's all hope the Dodgers don't pick up Epstein. That'd be...ewwww. Not good.

Who should they get?

It's still, perhaps, a bit of a mystery as to how many free agent starting pitchers the Giants will go for this offseason.

At least one is pretty much certain, as the vibes from the organization at the end of the season towards Brett Tomko seem to indicate he will not be offered a new contract. That isn't the worst thing, although I've dedicated some space in this blog explaining why bringing him back isn't a bad idea, either. Nevertheless, I'll work on the assumption he's gone.

But will the Giants go for another? That would depend on what the team feels about Brad Hennessey, what with the other three rotation spots being locked up by Jason Schmidt, Noah Lowry, and one would hope and assume, Matt Cain.

I'll make it simple, and just list the pitchers that I think would be worth it to go after, and worry about the rest later. I'll also throw in a few other pitchers that I think the Giants may take a look at for various reason, for variety's sake.

Right handers:

1. Matt Morris - I've said this before, but while Morris might just be the most sought after free agent starter out there (making the assumption that pitchers like A.J. Burnett and Kevin Millwood might be out of many teams' price range), he isn't really much better than Brett Tomko. However, on thing I really like about Morris is his k/bb ratio (3.16 for 2005) -- his k rate is middling, but he simply doesn't walk many batters. I wonder about the price tag, though. Morris made about the same as Tomko did last year at 2.5 million, but again, with the dearth of quality starting pitching available, and with the aforementioned Burnett and Millwood liable to command double digits millions, I'm sure Morris will get at least about five million or so per year. In any case, this is the pitcher I think the Giants should go for first and hardest. He ought to fit into the middle of the rotation nicely. And guess what? he just filed for free agency on October 29th, meaning he knows it's unlikely the Cardinals will offer him a new contract.
2. Paul Byrd - Another guy that walks very few batters, Byrd is an interesting possibility. I wonder at how much he'll command dollars/years wise (five million last year), but I doubt it'd be more than Morris. After an up and down career, he seemed to find something with the Royals in 2003, because he's been a decent pitcher since. But perhaps he'll be looking for something multi-year -- those last three season of decent pitching have been done with three different teams. However, a multi-year contract is just what the Giants should avoid with Byrd, not only because of the team situation payroll-wise, but because Byrd will turn 35 this December. If there isn't any other options, though, I suppose a two-year contract wouldn't hurt too much.
3. Jeff Weaver - Pitching-wise, a very good option as well, as long as he comes way down from the large contract he just finished -- likely, but not guaranteed. But really, folks -- if the Giants sign this guy, I'll end up throwing up in my mouth a little. He's a decent pitcher, but I just...don't...want...him.
4. Kevin Brown - Just throwin' this one out there. Brown just can't command too much money or much more than a simple one year contract at 40+ years of age, and coming off two years of sub-par performance and injury-shortened seasons. So...how much would be worth the risk? Two million? I'm mentioning this mostly because I can't help but think Brown, at a lower cost, would be a tempting lure for proven-veteran-hungry Brian Sabean. I don't really consider him much of an option.
5. Jason Johnson - Another one I'm just throwing out there...the only upgrade someone like Johnson is over Tomko is that he's a different pitcher. As a 5th starter, sure, but he isn't even better than Hennessey. But in this free agent market, he's actually one of the better options if one is looking for a 5th starter to eat some innings, which says a lot about the free agent market. Still, not somebody I want to see in a Giants uniform.

Left-handers:

1. Al Leiter - Exact same situation as Brown. Exact. Except that he's a left-hander, of course. And his name is different. But they're both 40, both have Proven Veteran tatooed on their keisters, and Sabes can never have enough old guys.
2. Jamie Moyer - Second verse, same as the first. He signs, I whine. Really, though, can any of us not see Sabean looking hard at all the 40-plus guys, if the price was right? I really want to just predict it right here, that one of the Three Old Amigos in Moyer, Leiter, or Brown will end up in the Giants rotation. But I won't, so don't ask.
3. Really, I'm not going to predict it. I mean, yes, I want to, and it fits with Sabean's pattern of player acquisition from last season, but I'm going to let it go. No more old guy comments for me. Cold turkey. Now. Right now.
4. Kenny Rogers - Must...not...make...comment...about...age. HE'S FORTY! (pant) (pant) Alright, another option that isn't an option. Oh, he pitched very well up until he punked out and bullied a cameraman that was half his size, and he did it in a hitter's park, which was very impressive (the, uh, pitching, not the bullying of the cameraman...ahem), but he's is a punk. Don't want him, at any price.
5. Jerrod Washburn - The first real left-handed option I've mentioned, but Washburn may well prove to be too expensive. He pitched very well in the final year of his contract, and is at an age (31) where he'll probably be looking for at least a three or four year deal.
6. Shawn Estes - Heh, just kidding.

And that does it, folks. Matt Morris, Paul Byrd, and Jerrod Washburn. All the others I mentioned are very old and risky, or just undesirable. As it stands, I'm not sure what the Giants can afford, but I'm making the assumption that Burnett and Millwood are more than what the Giants can afford. Even the three I've mentioned may be looking for more money in total contract dollars rather than a per year basis, but with Byrd this should be avoided.

On a sidenote, is anyone planning to go see the movie Jarhead? I'm thinking about it, but it strikes me as one of those movies that will either be pretty good or very disappointing, without a middle ground. I'm worried most about Jamie Foxx in that supporting role (as a sargeant, I think). He's a very, very good actor, but after the pinnacle of having Ray do so well, in addition to critical acclaim in Collateral, he's made one poor decision already with Stealth, which bombed, and could be on the verge of another with Jarhead. I can just see him overacting in this movie too easily.

And so it Begins...or, er, well, continues, at any rate

Expect the unexpected is an oft-used cliche. A phrase I often amalgamate with that cliche is: set your expectations low, and thus avoid unneccessary disappointments.

I expected Brian "the Brain" Sabean to bring back veteran ballplayers Jason Schmidt and Randy Winn, exercising both players' options for 2006.

What I didn't expect was for Sabes to re-sign veteran Jeff Fassero.

Should I have expected it? Oh, yes, of course. Why did I not do this? Because I held out hope that the Giants GM would have an epiphany of brain activity and realize that while Fassero was uber-useful last season, the Giants cannot reasonably expect him to repeat last year's performance. Reasons?

1. The first reason is broken down into 44 parts, one part for each year of age that Fassero wil have accumulated by Spring Training in 2006.
2. Since 1998, Fassero has had two decent/good seasons: 2001, and 2005. Leading up to 2005, Fassero had been poor for three straight seasons. If the trend is poor for three straight seasons, then all of a sudden turns decent again at 43 years of age, do you really think this last decent season is a harbinger of Fassero's 2006 performance?
3. Overuse. Fassero was used too much last year, and in some games it showed. At his age, I can't help but think similar use in 2006 will lead to time on the DL for the ol' left-hander.

Combatting all this is the slim possibility that the Giants management will use Fassero exclusively as a long man and spot starter out of the bullpen, in which case things might not be too bad. But with Father Alou, he who is inficted with the rare disease, Usus Too Muchus Bullpenitis, this is a longshot. Fassero will likely find himself pitching well-nigh 100 innings again next year in a myriad of roles, straining his arm to the breaking point again.

While I'd still have rather seen Sabean thank the stars he got as much out of Fassero as he did last season and cut bait on Fassero while the memories were good, if they can keep the old dude down to about 50-60 innings, it could work out.

But you know what they say about expectations...

The White Sox are world champions...

...and I have the most excruciating pain in my side. Given a choice of which one I could handle easier, it'd be the pain in my side by a landslide.

It's not that I'm not...happy...for the White Sox -- if at least one defines happy as the same feeling as being told you've won 100 million dollars, only to be told afterwards that to keep the money you had to go celibate for the rest of your life -- I mean, I'm sure they worked hard for their championship, blood, sweat, tears (mostly mine as they got closer), etc.

But, well, perhaps it's my continued agony in Royals fandom, and that 90% of my interaction with White Sox fans as a Royals fan have been...poor...and that the same 90% of interaction with those White Sox fans had to have been the most unintellectual pieces of conversation I've ever had the displeasure of having.

Perhaps it's the North Side/South Side hype that has gotten to me, and the White Sox's perceived persona -- bad guys, wearing black, rowdy fans, their stadium of U.S. Cellular One that's nicknamed "the Cell" -- that put them on my short list of Most Hated Baseball Franchises.

Maybe it's the fact that they picked up Dustin Hermanson, and got a lot of very good relief pitching out of him that could have been to the Giants' benefit early in the 2005 season, had they re-signed him. Maybe it's picking up "Double Play" A.J. Pierzynski, and having that rat bastard on their team while they won a World Series, with him taking center stage in the LCS against the Angels with his "savvy" play on that strikeout, running to 1st base after the caught strikeout pitch was rolled away (it was savvy, and it was smart, but it's smart and savvy like running all the way around the bases on a close but obvious foul ball, just in case the umps change their minds -- yeah, you're smart and savvy, but there's still no way you should get away with it).

Or, finally, maybe it's watching the first two games of the Series and realizing how flawed the Astros were, and thinking that despite the fact that they outplayed the Cardinals in the LCS and deserved to go to the World Series, that the Cardinals would've matched up much better than they did to Chicago. I mean, there's no way that the Cardinals would've allowed the White Sox to walk them 12 times in a game and not win. Albert Pujols, by himself, would've driven in more runs than the Astros scored in that game.

But this in no way hampers my ability to see what the White Sox are; a very good team that was simply better than every team they played against in the postseason. You don't whip through October only losing one game for nothing. Whatever Ozzie Guillen is doing, I hope some of it rubs off on Felipe Alou and Buddy Bell.

Jazz for that...nether region of the rear end area

Smooth...

Yes, very smooth. I was recently treated to a jazz show at Jack London Square in Oakland by my Pops, at Yoshi's Japanese restaurant and jazz house this past weekend. The show starred some well-known names in the jazz circle: Christian McBride (String Bass), John Clayton (string bass), Russell Malone (guitar), Greg Hutchinson (drums), and last but definitely not least, Benny Green from Berkeley (piano).

Now, as a few of you may know by the names involved, this is not modern jazz, something which is nice, but to me a bit lacking in personality. No, this was classic jazz, all in tribute to string bassist Ray Brown, who passed away about three years ago and whose birthday was on the 14th of October.

The show was incredible. All of the musicians knew each other, and have played together in some capacity before, a couple of whom have played together extensively. The common thread was Mr. Ray Brown, and the fact that all the musicians were either pupils of Brown, or had played with him many times before (they called it "graduating from the Ray Brown school").

Imagine a reknowned guitarist like Russell Malone cocking his head curiously as the Amtrack train rolled by, causing a bit of feedback. Turning to pianist Benny Green (on this particular song it was only the two of them), he shot him a look of inquiry (and all of this while both men are still hitting every note). Green shrugs his shoulders, smiling in amusement. Malone stops playing briefly to reach over and pound his amplifier with a fist, shoots the audience a little smile (his smiles were rare, but golden), and continues right where he left off, right back into the rhythm like nothing ever happened.

Imagine Christian McBride and John Clayton doing a little SuperBass competition at the start of the show, both men's hands flying over the string effortlessly, playing the entire instrument from top to bottom. Playing a game of "Can you top this?", McBride finally cuts loose a simply nasty and unmatchable string of chords, both hands weaving a blurry pattern of music. After he finally stops, Clayton, watching all of this with a huge grin, simply reaches down to his bass and plucks about three amusing chords, shrugs, and says, "That's about all I can do after that."

Imagine Greg Hutchinson, simply keeping pace for most of the show...that is, until the drum solos where he went ballistic, dredlocks twirling in unison, and his wrists putting out percussion like a man possessed. All the other musicians would simply watch, or in the case of Benny Green and Russell Malone, turn fully around so that they could watch the man do what he was born to do.

The ad-libs the musicians put on were two parts inspired and two parts hilarious. I saw the show twice, and while they didn't replay any songs from the first to the second show, if you paid attention you could tell where a player would throw in a little wrinkle into the music. An extra little smile here, a wink there, a short laugh, a quiet exclamation of "Alright now", or "Mmm hm!" was all that was needed to confirm that these guys had no need or no desire to do it all by the numbers -- they are masters of their instruments and the music, and they could play the same song a hundred different ways if they wanted. Malone put on the funniest one, throwing in three quick funky strums at the end of one of his solos, turning and looking back at the McBride and Clayton on the bass. McBride returned the look with a head shake and a grin, and Malone shrugs, turned back to the audience, and favored us with a wink and a smile.

Inbetween songs, they told stories of Ray Brown and how he influenced them in their careers. During songs, they smiled and told stories with their hands and fingers. At both times, we in the audience listened with rapt attention, and ready applause. I've never listened to a jazz show before, yet I instinctively knew when a solo was over, and knew when it was worthy of audible appreciation (as it so happened, that was every, single time a solo was over).

All in all, I would have to say I was most impressed with Benny Green, the local product. The only White guy in the band, he showed that he has more than enough soul to play this music. Short, slim, with hair hanging just below his ears, he spoke just like he looked -- the ultimate cool cat. He'd often turn 3/4th of the way away from the piano, while playing, to look at one of the string bassists, Malone on the guitar, or Hutchinson on the drums, never missing a key. When he wasn't playing, he was at ease. When he was playing, he was just stupid good.

To summarize, if you aren't into classic jazz at all, then Yoshi's is a good place to check it out, as they constantly have shows there. If you are into classic jazz, but haven't heard much of the music of the musicians I've been mentioning, then you need to acquire some. I myself don't have any, but I got the hook-up, with Pops on the job burning me copious amounts of the stuff to peruse at my leisure.

If you don't have hook-up, well, then get yourself hooked-up.

White Sox, Astros, AJ, and Darth Ozzie

Thought I'd chime in on the LCS while Daniel is busy finding a job (good luck, man!).

I've temporarily deactivated my Insta-Boycott of Fox TV and watched all of the LCS games broadcast on free TV (I'm one of those weirdos who refuses to pay for cable). My pathetic attempts to apply all I've learned this season into meaningful predictions over on Small Ball have done only one thing: made me look incredibly stupid. That doesn't mean I'm not having fun.

When the White Sox blew through their series with the Angels, I was regularly on the horn with my peeps in Chicago, people I knew during the 7 years I lived there. I wondered if Fox's representation of the explosive celebrations was accurate (questioning Fox's accuracy is, like baseball, a national pasttime). I was pleased though not shocked to learn that the fervor for White Sox successes isn't quite as pandemic as Fox would have you believe. The traditional north-side/south-side tension between Cubs fans and White Sox fans is in full force. The Cubs, for reasons no one really understands, evoke a frenzy of loyalty that makes religious fundamentalists look like lazy non-believers. White Sox fans, on the other hand, appear as if summoned by magic whenever the White Sox seem to be doing well.

My favorite TV moment occured in a nondescript Chicago sports bar the night the Sox took the pennant. While the cameras lingered on girls gone wild and drunk guys hootin' and hollerin', one guy in the background who was wearing a White Sox cap tore it off when he saw the lights and cameras pointing in his general direction, and replaced it with a Cubs cap. That hilarious gesture revealed so many things. As my friends have confirmed, Cubs fans who want some--any--gratification this year are throwing their dashed hopes in the White Sox's ring so they at least can say they live in a championship city. Which makes me wonder what that very same bar scene would have looked like if the Cubs and Sox positions were reversed. Would it be empty because the White Sox were out of the picture? Would the exact same patrons be there, wearing Cubbie colors instead? At what point in a 2-team city do the fans of one team throw up their arms and hitch to the other team's wagon? Even I'll admit that for about three weeks this season, I was an As fan (don't disparage me...what else did I have to root for?)

I found the ALCS monumentally boring. There's no there there. Rooting for the White Sox is like rooting for Chevron or Dell Computers. I found in my heart a little California lovin' for the Angels, but that was an empty, callous love fueled only by my desire to see the Sox fail.

The NLCS? Now, that's some baseball. Exciting at nearly every turn, with heroes and villains out of the best pulp fiction. My mom and I were talking about the differences between the National and American Leagues. Why, I asked, does she, like I do, feel so strongly about NL teams, but nearly nothing for AL teams? She said she always felt like a participant in the goings on of the National League, and simply a spectator for "that other" league. So, it's entirely possible that my fascination with the Cardinals/Astros struggle and my indifference to the Angels/White Sox struggle boils down to a matter of what feels warm and toasty to me.

The Astros and Cardinals, although I'm not a fan of either, are kind of warm and toasty.

Last night's gut-wrenching turn of events for the Astros was better than anything Hollywood can pump out under the auspices of drama. Two three-run homers, one by each team late in the game, turned the contest into an offensive tennis tournament. Astros were down by a run, then up by two, then down by one again too late to get back up again. As I sat there stuffing my face with chocolates, I realized after the Pujols homer in the top of the ninth that, yeah, it's cool that St. Louis won, although I would have prefered to see Houston win. And saying that is more excruciating than I have time to describe.

So, here we are. White Sox going to the World Series. White Sox probably winning the World Series. More Cubs fans masquerading as Sox fans turning into deluxe girls and guys gone wild. Two Curse Reverses in a row. The return of baseball might to the midwest. Ozzie Guillen for governor. AJ Piersomething-something's ego seen floating over Lake Michigan on a collision course with the John Hancock building.

Or...

Or they could lose. And wouldn't that be warm and toasty?

Quick Note

Just saying hello to everyone, and that my reason for abusing the blog is really just a time issue. I've been attempting to change jobs for a while, but it's picked up in the last couple of weeks with a couple of interviews, 2nd interviews, and those lovely assessment tests.

Assessment tests, you ask? Well, you know, they're like psyche tests -- you answer 350 multiple choice questions, many of which ask you the same general question as a bunch of other questions, only worded differently. For example:

1. I have no problem speaking in front of a large group of people.

A) Agree, B) ?, C) Disagree

50. I was always shy as a child.

A) Agree, B) ?, C) Disagree

147. I don't have any reservations in speaking to a total stranger.

A) Agree, B) ?, C) Disagree

You know, something like that. I took two tests on Thursday, the first of which actually was about 360 questions long and multiple choice, and the second of which was about 150 questions long and true/false. I told my interviewer that if they offer me the job, I'll consult them before making my decision, because after reviewing those tests they'll know more about me than I do myself.

So, in any case, these things have left me feeling a little down on writing on a daily basis, hence the 11-day gap between entries. While I'm not going to do anything everyday until at least after the new year begins (and the winter meetings have finished and some new things are happening), I do at least want to do a couple/few per week.

As far as the playoff races go...at least the Yankees are out of it, but the White Sox are still around, and now have a chance to win a World Series, which'll probably make me vomit as soon as the final out is recorded...check that, I'll vomit if they even come within one game of winning it.

With Houston up three games to one, it looks like they're my only hope of not chalking up 2005 as one of my worst baseball season ever as a fan. Both the Giants and Royals were poor (the Royals being absolutely horrible) and...the White Sox as World Series champs?

Let me just stick hot pokers in my eyes now, rather than endure that pain later.

Somebody excorcise these demons!

A stupid, stupid thought has taken root in my brain and found the soil fertile and rich. It has grown and flourished, this thought, to the point where I am actually typing it out to post on my blog, where anywhere from 60 to 120 people per day will be able to ascertain how much of an idiot I am.

I'm warning you, it's really dumb. I am in no way suggesting that I think it should happen, but I'm entertaining the notion that it could happen.

The Philadelphia Phillies have a 3rd baseman in David Bell who made 4.7 million in 2005 to hit a crappy .248/.310/.361 and play acceptable defense at 3rd base.

The San Francisco Giants have a 3rd baseman in Edgardo Alfonzo who made about 7 million in 2005 to hit a crappy .277/.327/.345 and play acceptable defense at 3rd base.

No, no, NO! I'm not suggesting a swap. What I'm suggesting is that both players are paid a large amount of money to suck a lot, and thus have initiated an extreme desire on the part of the ball clubs that pay them to get rid of them in any way they can.

The Phillies have another contract on their hands that is large, has turned horrible, and probably makes the Phillies want to get rid of it -- Jim Thome's contract. He was paid 13 million + to be injured most of the year, and suck something fierce when he did play.

Do you think that Brian Sabean would gamble and trade Alfonzo for Thome? I don't know if this could be done straight up, but I actually think it could be, given that Thome's a larger waste of money at this point than Fonzie is, although he has obviously had a much better career -- in other words, Thome's a much larger risk/gamble to take, which makes me think that a straight-up trade involving those two could be done.

Thome's old, old, but his dropoff in production this year is nothing short of astounding. No middle ground, no gradual loss of skill -- it all hit rock bottom, baby. Which may lead somebody like Sabes to think that it was a fluke (even I think there's got to be some fluke in that big of a dropoff), and perhaps want to give Thome a whirl -- with the caveat that he could get rid of one of his problem children in Alfonzo.

Like I said, it's pretty stupid from about eleventy-seven angles, but for some reason the thought that it would be an alluring option for Sabes has grabbed ahold of my imagination. Just remember, if something like that happens, you heard it here first. If it comes nowhere close to even being a smidgen in the general vicinity of eventually gravitating towards the miniscule germ of an intention, then you've never heard of me, and in fact, my name is Mortimer Bartholomew, and I run a horticulture blog, not a baseball blog.

So, I'm lazy...you act like that's bad or something.

Just dropping in to say I'll be doing some heavy-duty stuff over this weekend, as I have Friday through Sunday off. What kind of heavy-duty stuff, you ask?

The kind that tries to figure out which free-agent starting pitcher the Giants should go for (since from all I've heard, it seems Brett Tomko definitely ain't coming back), and tries to figure out how next year lineup should be contructed, since it looks like the team will largely remain intact as far as position players.

I'd also like to extend a tip of my cap to Joe Giovannetti over at Giants Cove for plugging a couple of pieces of work I did on Randy Winn and Brett Tomko on one of his pieces on the site.

It also seems congratulations are in order, as a sports website called Deadspin has ranked the top three Giants blogs, and Joe and Nick Cannata-Bowman took 2nd -- just in front of Grant at McCovey Chronicles, and just behind John Perricone over at Only Baseball Matters. If I had my druthers (normally I do have them, but I lost my druthers just the other day -- I blame the hole in my pants pocket), I would have found a way to include Lefty and Anthony, but last I checked I wasn't the one who put that article together for Deadspin. Plus, putting together an article on the top three Giants blogs while including five probably isn't the best way to do things.

But I'd have done it anyway.

And oddly, I didn't get a mention as the best Giants blog whose writer also like the Kansas City Royals, which ought to have come up somewhere. I mean, where's my sympathy vote? It's all rigged, I tell ya.

BTW, Deadspin also ranked the top three Royals blogs, however, either it wasn't the same writer as the one who ranked the Giants blogs, or it was the same writer and he suffered a brief fit of stupidity. None of my favorites were on his list, and one of the ones on his list was Rob Neyer's site, which is in no way a Royals blog -- Neyer and Rany Jayzareli exchange e-mails about the club about twice a month and put it on the site, which doesn't, to me, qualify it for anything. I also disagree with his selection for first place (kind of like a nuclear bomb disagrees with all life surrounding its blast), but I won't mention any names or reasons -- ambiguity is the word for today, boys and girls.

Goodnight sweetheart, well, it's time to go...

Last game, Giants. Let's end the season on a winning, note, alright?

See? This is what I mean

Next year, they gotta see what I'm talking about.

Randy Winn had better not lead off, for the same reasons that Ray Durham doesn't lead off anymore -- if the Giants want to believe that a good portion of the pop Winn is displaying is for real (some of it is) and that Winn will continue to be an extra-base machine next season, then they have to put him into a position where he'll be able to drive in some runs. Leading off, especially for a National League team, isn't going to cut it.

Lemme show you why this is. Winn has hit 14 home runs for the Giants, including the two he hit last night. The breakdown of how many he drove in with those round-trippers go like this:

Solo - 12
2R - 2
3R - 0
GS - 0

You can't hit all multi-run shots when you hit a home run, of course, but don't you think having 12 of your 14 total home runs be solo shots is a bit of a waste, not to mention the two that aren't be of the two-run variety?

The Giants' offense is still pretty poor without Barry Bonds, of course, but the Giants burying their best hitter over the last couple of months in the leadoff spot just because he's a "leadoff-type hitter" is asinine, and it cost the Giants runs, and perhaps victories (two of the three losses in games where Winn homered were by one run, and the other was by two runs).

This does not include doubles and triples, which are perfectly capable of scoring men on-base as well. But when you have the pitcher's spot and a guy in Mike Matheny who, at best, runs a .300 on-base percentage (and isn't exactly fleet of foot on the basepaths, either), there just aren't going to be many ducks on the pond for Winn to drive in if he happens to hit a double, triple, or home run, something he's done with great frequency since joining the club. Again, the Giants, through ignorance of common sense, have left a lot of runs out there unscored.

Old dog Father Alou, please learn a new trick next year. Just because he's supposed to be your leadoff hitter doesn't mean you have to bat him leadoff all the time (you seemed to learn this with Ray Durham) -- let Omar Vizquel handle that, and you can bat Winn 2nd, or even 5th, since Winn and Durham seem fairly similar hitters, especially from the left side.