Tuesday, July 18, 2006 |
Pickoff Moves
Today's Birthdays
Johnny Hopp BRO b. 1916, played 1949, All-Star: 1946, d. 2003-06-01. A 1B/OF type on the mediocre 1946 Boston Braves, he spent most of seven seasons with the mostly wartime Cards, hitting .336 against 1944's depleted pitching. He played eight games in a Brooklyn uniform sandwiched between stints with the Pirates, for whom he actually hit pretty well. 1950 was the end of his usefulness, but somehow managers let him hang around for a couple more years anyway.
Rudy May CAL b. 1944, played 1965, 1969-1974. Why is this name familiar to me? Of all the mediocre pitchers the Angels have had on staff over the years, what about him sticks in my ear? Oh, of course. He's the guy the Angels got back for Bo Belinsky. Belinsky had seven wins total after leaving the Angels; May had seven wins in 1970 alone. I'd call that a winning trade, even if May only had one winning season with the Halos.
Panic Time, Already? Diamondbacks 8, Dodgers 3
The Dodgers, the Times informs us, are or should be hot to make a trade before the deadline. With last night's loss causing them to leave the over-.500-club on the heels of an increasingly worrisome five-game skid, already the cries begin to have them slink away into the swamps of irrationality and suddenly declare their formerly impressive offense to have failed. Bad time for it; everybody knows they can squeeze you harder when you're losing.Well, it's a slump. The offense ought to pick it up again. (I hope. Hurry up, Matt Kemp.) But Aaron Sele, well, we know him. And Lowe, well, he's lost that lovin' feelin', at least, for his sinker.
Roster Notes
- Both Jered Weaver and Kelvim Escobar are still expected to make their next starts.
- Joe Saunders, on his situation with the Angels:
It's a little bit frustrating because I know I can pitch at this level. A lot of guys at triple A can play at this level, but there's not a spot for them.
People say you would have a better shot elsewhere, but you're not just pitching for your team, you're pitching for everybody.... The best thing for me to do is pitch my tail off and make it the hardest decision [for the Angels].
- Nick Swisher may have mono. Stop kissin' Casey, then.
- Frank Francisco probably won't be back in the Rangers' bullpen this season.
- Those castigating me for having the temerity to point out Dustin Moseley's inadequacies should take note of Jason Windsor's three-run, five-inning game against the Orioles in which he received a no-decision. (The A's lost anyway, thanks to Kirk Saarloos, helping the Angels out in the standings.) Not all rookie pitchers have 7+ ERAs after their first game.
There WERE, however, two sharp liners (one to Izturis, one to Kennedy) hit with men on base taht would have changed the outcome of the Moseley's game had they not been speared...
: 7/18/2006 10:49:00 AMUm...is this a whimper or a scream?
You've been enjoining all of us not to trust Jered Weaver's successes for a month now. So, first performances are not predictive of career trends, unless you feel like biting fleas at the moment?
Ervin Santana was 13.50 after his first game. If the Angels had made the unfortunate decision to leave him up, he surely would've been clobbered. Oh, wait...
: 7/18/2006 11:25:00 AMMoseley did his job, which was to give up fewer runs than innings pitched.
: 7/18/2006 11:59:00 AMBut this is the offense that couldn't beat Carlos Silva! Erm...
: 7/18/2006 12:14:00 PM
I don't get why this is so difficult.
It's a little thing called context. Not all performances are objectively great or objectively awful. If it's John Lackey giving up four runs in five innings, it's an awful start. If it's a guy making his first major league start, who was surprised to even get the call, who was facing one of the best offenses in the league, it's about as good as can be reasonably expected. I'm still at a loss as to how comparing Mosely's start with Windsor's start changes that. No one has claimed that Mosely's start was the stuff of legend, but most people have been able to put it in it's proper context.
And as others have pointed out, the determination that Mosely was "horrible" is coming from the same guy who's seen nothing but fly balls and more fly balls from Jered Weaver when everyone else seems to see outs, wins, and zeroes on the scoreboard. In other words, Mosely sucked and is likely to suck in the future, whereas Weaver was awesome, and is likely to suck in the future. Whatever.
Newer› ‹Older
 |
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.