Overheard: Imagining The Unimaginable

Tonight on ESPN's Sunday Night Baseball game featuring the Los Angeles Angels at the Detroit Tigers, Peter Gammons made the following report:

The Paper Tigers were supposed to roar through the 2008 season with the second highest payroll and a lineup that many projected to score 1000 runs only to lose their first 7 games and 10 of their first 12.

Little could they have imagined that they would have to do without Curtis Granderson until this past Wednesday after breaking his hand in spring training or that Gary Sheffield would need cortisone shots for both of his aching shoulders or that Placido Polanco would miss 8 games with a cranky back or that Jim Leyland would feel it necessary to flip-flop Miguel Cabrera and Carlos Guillen at the corner infield positions or that Justin Verlander would come into tonight's start with a 5.93 earned run average.

Dontrelle Willis would not only walk 9 in 5 innings but be disabled with a twisted knee in his second start. They would come into this game with the worst starting pitching ERA in the American League and only 4 quality starts through 25 games.

But this week this team that scored 2 runs or less in 6 of its first dozen games exploded for 37 runs against the mediocre pitching of the Texas Rangers. Leyland had reassembled the defense and now tonight hopes Verlander will regain his delivery and velocity and continue the process of fulfilling Detroit's lofty expectations.

Now, before I tear this "report" to shreds, a couple caveats: 1) the guys at Fire Joe Morgan do this kind of thing much better than I ever will and 2) I am very fond of Peter Gammons.

So, with that, let's parse.

Now, I understand what Gammons is trying to do here. By talking about all the misery that befell the Tigers, he's reminding the casual viewer of the folly of predictions as well as the quirks and the human element of baseball - 'That's why they play the games.' That sort of thing. Gammons has a very romantic view of baseball and that's always been part of his appeal for me.

Having said that, I read an awful lot of baseball writing and many if not most of these disaster scenarios were not only predictable, they were in fact predicted.

Where do we start?

The Paper Tigers...

I love how he disses and dismisses them as "paper tigers" who presumably don't deserve the acclaim they've been given and then proceeds to give us like 57 reasons they haven't achieved everything that was prematurely projected.

A lineup that many projected to score 1000 runs...

I'm too lazy to link to all the sites and writers that de-bunked the 1000 runs theory; let's just say that those who projected it share their analytical framework with John Kruk, who sagely predicted that Randy Johnson would win 30 games for the Yankees in 2005.

They would have to do without Curtis Granderson until this past Wednesday after breaking his hand...

It's fair to say they couldn't have imagined an injury with this amount of specificity, but a good number of analysts pointed out Granderson as a strong bet to regress in 2008.

...or that Gary Sheffield would need cortisone shots for both of his aching shoulders...

Gary Sheffield is 39 years old and missed roughly 150 games over the previous two seasons combined. The real shocker would be if he didn't miss significant playing time in 2008.

...or that Placido Polanco would miss 8 games with a cranky back...

Polanco missed 20 games last year and 52 the year before. They'd be lucky if he only misses 8 games this year. Where are you going with this, Peter? Peter? I think he wandered out into the driveway again. I hope he's wearing shoes this time. Be right back.

...or that Jim Leyland would feel it necessary to flip-flop Miguel Cabrera and Carlos Guillen at the corner infield positions...

Miggy is a wonderful hitter, among the best in the game, but he is a fat tub of goo large bodied individual who is a butcher with the glove challenged by the defensive requirements at the hot corner. I've been reading for two years that he would have to be switched to 1B or DH eventually.

As for Guillen, it was already unusual that he moved to 1B from SS (when Edgar Renteria arrived from Atlanta in the offseason to play SS); 3B is a more natural transition for an aging shortstop and a better fit for his offensive and defensive profile.

...or that Justin Verlander would come into tonight's start with a 5.93 earned run average.

Verlander's velocity has been down and it's no surprise that his results have suffered. Chances are, it's just a slump and by September none of us will remember his slow start. Hell, his ERA is less than half of what C.C. Sabathia's was through three starts.

Having said that, I've always felt Verlander was at least a teensy bit overrated in the popular imagination. As his struggles so far suggest, if he doesn't have that superior velocity, he's a very average pitcher. Still, I'd be willing to bet this is mostly just small sample size nonsense.

UPDATE: Verlander surrendered 6 ER on 7 H and 4 BB in 5 and 2/3 innings to up his season ERA to 6.50. Uh oh.

Dontrelle Willis would not only walk 9 in 5 innings but be disabled with a twisted knee in his second start.

Putting aside the wildness, which I think was eminently predictible (his walk rate has been rising steadily over the past few seasons), it feels like Gammons is resting his 'could little have imagined' case on the weird specificity of these injuries. Could the Tigers have imagined at the end of March that Willis would go down with a twisted knee in his second start? That Sheffield would require cortisone shots in both shoulders? That Cabrera would eat and digest a frightened and confused Brandon Inge in front of his teammates in the Detroit clubhouse? Probably not. You win again, Gammons. You win again.

They would come into this game with the worst starting pitching ERA in the American League and only 4 quality starts through 25 games.

You're right, Peter. We all thought they would have 5 quality starts and the second worst ERA in the American League. That's the folly of prediction. Lesson learned.

But this week this team that scored 2 runs or less in six of its first dozen games exploded against the mediocre pitching of the Texas Rangers.

They were cold? Now they're hot? They got hot against bad pitching? This is Hall of Fame stuff, Peter. What's that? You're already in the Hall of Fame? Dammit!

I give up. Gammons wins again.


OMG, he's rocking with Theo! He's so cool!111!!!111!

Overheard on Extra Innings: Tom Seaver Had A Rubber Arm

Did you know Tom Seaver won both games of a doubleheader once? True story.



On tonight's Sports Time Ohio broadcast of the Indians-Twins game, the announcers were reminiscing about 20+ inning games of the past, apropos of, well, you know.

STO color man and former MLB outfielder Rick Manning described a 25* inning game he played in for the Brewers against the White Sox in 1984**, which at 8:06 is the longest game ever played in the MLB by time (and tied for the 2nd longest by innings).

The game began on May 8, 1984, and was suspended at 6-6 after 17 innings. Play resumed on May 9, and the teams played another scoreless 7 innings before Tom Seaver entered the game in the top of the 25th. He retired Bill Schroeder, Robin Yount and Cecil Cooper in order. In the bottom of the 25th, Harold Baines came up for the White Sox with 1 out and hit a solo home run to win the game, 7-6.

Since the teams were already scheduled to play each other on the 9th, they went ahead and played just like it was the second game of a doubleheader. According to Manning, Seaver stayed loose between games by throwing in front of the dugout. He started the second game and threw an impressive 8 1/3 innings for the 5-4 win.

By 1984, Tom Seaver was on the downside of his career, but he still threw 230+ IP and went 15-11 with a 3.95 ERA that year. His real rubber arm days, however, had come years earlier. From 1967 to 1978, he threw fewer than 250 innings just once - 236 IP in 1974. He topped 270 IP in 7 of those seasons, topping out twice at 290 innings. Ye gods.

Just for that, let's get one more picture of Tom Terrific.



Incidentally, I can't even remember Seaver playing for the White Sox. As far as I'm concerned, he was a Met first and a Red second. Let's just pretend the South Side period never happened. Deal?


*I probably shouldn't throw Manning under the bus like this, but he thought it was a 26 inning game.

**He also thought the game happened in 1983.


Finally, this has nothing to do with either Tom Seaver or Rick Manning, but I thought you would want to know that Carlton Fisk caught all 25 innings of that first game, and went 3 for 11 at the plate.

All together: Carlton Fisk had rubber knees.

Overheard: Miguel Tejada is 100 years old

The interwebs are abuzz today with word of Miguel Tejada's age-based revelation.

My first reaction: I bet the Orioles are happy; Tejada was only 31 when they traded him. Once he went to Houston, he began aging in dog years or something.

"I'm old enough to be your poppy, Papi."

You know, I've always liked Miguel Tejada. He plays hard, he has fun and he's pretty darn good. Good note for up-and-coming ballplayers: Do those three things and I'll be a fan. I'm pretty easy that way.

"You traded me where?"

I suppose I'm a softie, but I can certainly understand why Tejada would have lied at the time he signed his first deal as a teenager in the Dominican Republic.

"I was a poor kid," Tejada said. "I wanted to sign a professional contract, and that was the only way to do it. I didn't want or mean to do anything wrong. At the time, I was two years older than they thought."

That reminds me: why are Dominican players such free swingers? Because you can't walk off the island.

Classic.

Lying about your age is wrong, no question. But let's call it a youthful error in judgment. There are certainly worse things you could do.

Whoops.

UPDATE: Tejada went 3-for-4 tonight with a home run, upping his season average to .328. Maybe he was relieved to have the monkey off his back?

Overheard on Extra Innings: Mike Marshall Had A Rubber Arm

This one's a couple days old, but worth the wait.

On Thursday's broadcast of the Padres-Astros' game, the Channel 4 San Diego broadcast team of Matt Vasgersian and Mark "Mud Cat" Grant were reminiscing about bullpen usage patterns in the past. They invoked the name Mike Marshall, and suggested that he used to pitch nearly every day out of the bullpen for the Dodgers. [Incidentally, there was another Mike Marshall who also played for the Dodgers, but was a hitter.]

Finding this to be an unlikely scenario, I checked my old friend Baseball Reference, which revealed the following: in 1974, Marshall made an incredible 106 appearances for the Dodgers, logging a totally insane 208 innings out of the bullpen. He went 15-12 with 21 saves and a 2.42 ERA. Along the way, Marshall won the National League Cy Young award and finished 3rd in the NL MVP voting.

208 innings! Out of the bullpen!



Nice chops. Marshall should have gotten MVP for the facial hair alone.

208 innings in 1974 was his high water mark, but the year before was nearly as impressive: 92 appearances, 179 innings pitched. His record was 14-11 with 31 saves and a 2.66 ERA. He was 2nd in the 1973 Cy Young voting and 5th in the NL MVP.

I sit, stand and kneel corrected. Hats off to Mark "Mud Flaps" Grant - I will never doubt you again. I searched for a picture of Grant under "San Diego broadcaster" and came up with this. I assume it's him - it says Channel 4:



That guy on the right looks familiar. I think he used to be the distributor for my paper route. Or something like that.

Overheard on Extra Innings: Impossible to Rush a Prospect

On this afternoon's FSN Ohio broadcast of the Reds-Phillies game, George Grande mentioned an FSN interview with Mario Soto, a former Reds' hurler who now helps the team as an informal pitching coach.

In the interview, according to Grande, Soto said that Edinson Volquez was rushed to the major leagues three years ago in the Texas system, and that it was a disservice to him.

To which Chris Welsh replied:

"You know, George. I'm not so sure if I buy into that argument. You know, it seems like people want to make excuses later on as to why a player didn't fulfill his potential by saying we rushed him along. I hear that about Corey Patterson; I hear that about a lot of other players. You don't hear that about Ken Griffey, Jr., when he broke in at age 19."

Um, okay.

Couple things, though.

One, Ken Griffey, Jr. is a second-generation major leaguer, a precocious natural talent who was selected #1 overall in the 1987 MLB draft, one of the greatest players of all-time and a sure first-ballot Hall of Famer despite losing parts of each of the last eight seasons to injury. Edinson Volquez is...not any of those things. Nor is Corey Patterson.

Two....well, do I really need a two?

If you're using Ken Griffey, Jr., as your player development template, you're probably going to be disappointed by the progress of every player in your system for the next fifty years.

Now that's a disservice.

Overheard on Extra Innings: Johan Who?

During the Royals-Twins game last night, the Kansas City broadcast crew noted that the trade of Johan Santana to the Mets wasn't as big a windfall for Royals' batters as you might think.

Despite being division rivals, the Royals faced Santana only once in 2007. On the other hand, they faced Boof Bonser six times.

Six times Boof.

That's random.

Overheard on Extra Innings: Morgan Ensberg is a Tool

On last night's YES broadcast, in the later innings of a 13-4 drubbing of the Yanks at the hands of the Rays, Michael Kay and Kenny Singleton were chuckling over a story about Morgan Ensberg.

Ensberg, new to the New York area, was apparently frustrated by getting a traffic citation. He wrote the following on a white board in the Yankees' clubhouse:

Contract with Yankees: $1.75 million

Cost of my car: $75,000

Getting a ticket for talking on a cell phone: Priceless




I'm still scratching my head as to why they would tell this story. Theoretically, this is the "color commentary" side of the broadcast and they're trying to help us get to know the player. Kenny thought it was nice that Ensberg had "a sense of humor about it".

I do feel like I know Morgan Ensberg a bit better today than I did yesterday and here is what I know: he is a tool.

But that's not too surprising - what, a professional athlete with an exaggerated sense of privilege and entitlement? I'm shocked - shocked! What's more interesting is that perhaps Kay and Singleton think he's a tool too and wanted to throw him under the bus. All in the name of helping us to get to know the player.

Does that count as a public service announcement?