TDA Bullpen - Our Writers' Blog

Wednesday, October 06, 2004

New Playoff Format Propsal

How Baseball can Increase Fan Interest and Revenue without Lengthening the Post-Season

MLB occasioonally suggests adding more games or teams to the post-season to increase revenue and fan interest. The proposals I've heard sound like they'd basically have an NHL-style hugely complex post-season, which is a bad idea. The playoff format of baseball should be changed, and there's a way to do it which would increase fan interest, speed up the schedule, and make sure every game of every playoff series up to the World Series matters.

I've hatched a lot of hare-brained schemes for reforming baseball over the years, and I haven't gotten a single call from Commissioner Selig to follow up on any one of them...but, on the premise that if I mention them long enough and hard enough something will happen, here's another. Baseball's strange form of conservatism and radicalism about its playing conditions -- astroturf and the DH are OK, but allowing a pitcher to pitch from the left and right sides to the same batter are verboten, etc. etc. -- will probably prevent consideration of this kind of scheme, but I'm going to throw it out there on the merits.

Right now, the post-season format has many flaws. The most notable is the unequal number of games in the first round (five) versus the second and third rounds. More serious for the competitive chances of any given team, the luck of the draw on opponents -- now determined by strength of finish relative to the division -- is relatively arbitrary. Teams currently don't play the same schedule, so the records don't mean the same thing. And a club which has hotly contested a division or wildcard spot down the stretch is at a distinct disadvantage to a team that won in a cakewalk, even if in winning they are walking away with an easy division against predominantly weaker opponents. That's because they have no chance to re-set their starters, and in a best of five series, even with a superior team that may mean they're three-and-out.

Imagine, for example, the differences in the Astros' chances had they had to run Clemens out on Sunday to play for a tie for the wildcard spot followed by Oswalt in a playoff game on Monday. That would mean they wouldn't have Clemens until Game 4 in the post-season or Oswalt until a Game 5, and would be starting out the post-season with their 4th and 5th starters. Compare that to the reality of having been able to re-set their rotation against the Braves now.


Baseball has considered going to a seven-game LDS series, which I think is a mistake because it would set the World Series even further back on the calendar. I have suggested putting a week of "off" days between the end of the regular season and the start of the post-season, which baseball isn't about to do, either -- for one thing, it might lose marketing momentum of fans closely following the final days of races for playoff spots.

My plan is to eliminate the current LDS/LCS format to determine a World Series qualifier in each league, and use a "League Championship Tournament" format. Here's how it would work.

You have four teams in each league qualify for the playoffs, as now. Instead of a single-elimination playoff series format, each team would play the three other post-season qualified teams three times each --- three series of three games each.

Assume the four teams are ordered Seed 1, Seed 2, Seed 3, Seed 4 according to their regular-season records.

The best record in the league (Seed 1) would play all its games at home. The second-best (Seed 2) would play two series at home, one away (the single road series, of course, at Seed 1). Seed 3 would get two road series, one at home. Seed 4 would play all three series on the road.

So instead of a three-to-give game first round, we'd have a nine-game first round. This should take ten days.

How, you may ask, does this shorten the playoff season? It doesn't, but it gets more games played in the same amount of time. It lengthens the "first round" (LDS) and shortens the "second round" (current LCS).

This round robin takes up nine games. The top two finishers of this round robin would face one another in the "final phase" of the LCS, which would be a traditional best of seven -- with a twist. The twist is the first series in the round robin between the two teams that qualify counts toward the best-of-seven. So there would be a maximum of four additional games for the final LCS.

For example, say the Braves and Dodgers have the two best records in the round-robin, but in their mini-series, the Braves beat the Dodgers 2-1. They then "start" the LCS from that point -- two games to one -- with the Braves playing at home because they had the better record in the roub robin.

This means that the first ten games of the post-season schedule would be set in stone. No more "if necessary" for games in the third or fourth day of the post-season. This also means that, theoretically, every team would be "in it" for at least five games and probably for as many as seven games.

So what about teams that have been "eliminated"? You might have a team that, say, drops its first six games and then has three against a team still "alive". The secret is to add some incentive for this team to win above and beyond pride: an extra draft pick in the amateur draft, a larger share of the post-season pot for the higher they finish, something like that. But the reality of the numbers is this just won't happen that often. If a team loses 0-6 their first two series, that means the other teams maximum spread would be 3-3, 3-3, and 6-0. Obviously the 6-0 team only has to win one game in the last set to "clinch" a spot in the final round of this format, while the two 3-3 teams would be duking it out. Only if they're duking it out with one another and the 0-6 team is facing the 6-0 team is the latter series "meaningless".

The team with the best record in the round-robin phase of the tournament would get home-field for the remaining four games in the Championship round. Tiebreakers for getting into the championship round would go on head to head play in the tournament, and then overall tournament record, and then regular-season record.

Here's a sample schedule based on this year's NL finishers:

Seed 1 - Cardinals
Seed 2 - Braves
Seed 3 - Dodgers
Seed 4 - Astros

Days 1-3: Astros at Cardinals, Dodgers at Braves

Days 4-6: Braves at Cardinals, Astros at Dodgers

Day 7: Astros at Braves, Dodgers at Cardinals
Days 8-9 (as necessary) Astros at Braves, Dodgers at Cardinals

Day 10: off day.

Day 11: LCS Game "4".
Day 12-14: LCS Games 5-7, if necessary.

This gets us to the end of the first two rounds of playoffs in just two weeks -- exactly what we have now. The maximum number of games a team would play is 13 (9+4), as opposed to the current format where the maximum is 12 (5 + 7). The minimum number of games a champion would play is 10, as opposed to the current 7.

Here's the real beauty of this scheme. The minimum number of games any single team would play would be seven (assuming an 0-7 of 1-6 team where they are playing a team in the final round of the round robin that has a four-game advantage over all three teams by that point). It's more likely that all four teams would end up playing eight or nine games, since relative records will count.

And, the minimum number of playoff games -- contests -- is 19. Right now, that number is ten -- assuming two three-game sweeps followed by a four-game sweep in the LCS in the current format.

So you can book nearly twice the guaranteed advertising revenue, and especially in local markets where a team might be three-and-out now, you're guaranteed at least seven games will be played. If MLB is concerned it has a big-market team to keep up viewership, here's a way to ensure no big-market team in the playoffs will be eliminated in the first week.

From a competitive standpoint, this would mean every team at a minimum has to go through its rotation twice. So teams that have two dominant starters would not be at the huge advantage they are under the current format, where an opposing team with four "B" pitchers never really has a chance. This essentially negates any advantage a team that has been able to "set" its rotation by clinching early has over a team that has to fight down to the wire to qualify for the playoffs. The latter team may be a bit more tired, of course, but they'll at least get a chance to match their best on the field.

I would leave the World Series format as is. That has a century-long history, and it's best to keep playing it the same way. But we've changed the "qualifying" formats five times since 1969, so there are no sacred cows to worry about here.

posted by The Crank 10:10 AM

Tuesday, October 05, 2004

Twins Win Pivotal Game 1

I'm not sure I would describe Johan Santana's performance tonight against the Yankees as strong, but it was certainly effective, and ultimately that's all that matters. The breaks that the Yankees always seem to manufacture never materialized tonight, as Santana threw a deceptively low total of 93 pitches in shutting out the Yankees through 7 innings before giving way to Juan Rincon and Joe Nathan in the 8th and 9th.

New York certainly had their chances, then watched them snatched away one by one as the game progressed. Inning-ending strike-'em-out-throw-'em-outs. Outfield assists at the plate. Rockets directly to short that started inning-ending 6-4-3's. Unbelievable catches at the wall. A ball missing by a whisker of being a down-the-line homer. Also worth noting is that the Yanks managed nine hits in seven innings off of Santana, a guy who gave up 14 hits in July.

This sets up another pivotal game, Game 2, tomorrow night. The Yankees had exactly the right game plan against Santana -- jump on the first pitch if it was there and make him get his offspeed stuff over the plate. Look for a similar strategy against Brad Radke. If Radke has better command than Santana it could mark a swift exit from the playoffs this year for New York, and at the very least would allow Twins' manager Ron Gardenhire the luxury of pitching Santana on full rest Sunday in Game 5. If not, the Yankees will even up the series and head to Minnesota with a series that's up-for-grabs.

posted by Tom Renbarger 9:59 PM

Why the Cards Will Tank

I'm writing this in the first inning of the Dodgers-Cards game in St. Louis, so within a couple of hours I'll be a prophet or a fool. The conventional wisdom is that a 105-win team is the prohibitive post-season favorite. But here's why I think the Cards will tank no later than the LCS and why the Dodgers at least have a shot in a short series (who doesn't?)

The record is deceiving. If you look at the Cards' season, they benefited from three or four things to pad that win total. They had a couple of extra series against weak NL Central teams because of the lopsided divisional configuration. They got the AL West in interleague, at a time when the A's, Rangers, and Mariners were all playing poorly. They got the majority of their Reds, Astros, Braves, LA, and SF games when those teams were playing in poor streaks. I can't quantify this, but it sure looks like luck and the schedule helped the Cards this year.

The Cards Rotation is not in good shape. Carpenter's hurt, Marquis's been doing it with smoke and mirrors, Matt Morris has been awful since May, Woody Williams was wobbly going into the post-season. It's not a dominating set of pitchers, and the Cards will rely on their bullpen more than most.

Weak defense in the middle infield. Womack and Renteria have very limited range up the middle. A lot of Renteria's weaknesses are masked by Scott Rolen's extra range.

The offense isn't as good as you might think. Rolen's still playing hurt. Edmonds has been in a slump all month. Tony Womack has a pretty empty resume from the leadoff slot even with an up year. The catching slot's a null. Left field is still a question after 162 games.

Tony LaRussa thinks too much. He flips pitchers, he hits and runs, he steals, he pinch hits. With a lineup like Walker-Pujols-Rolen-Edmonds this isn't necessary, but he overmanages the way he's always overmanaged. This tendency tends to trip up managers in short series -- which is why LaRussa still has no ring in the NL, and why Bobby Cox has only 1 in 12 post-season trips.

As I write this, Albert Pujols has just put the Cards ahead on a solo shot off Odalis Perez, so I'm now officially gunning for fool -- for now. Woody Williams threw 25 pitches in the first.

posted by The Crank 10:22 AM

Sunday, October 03, 2004

End of the Year Hardware, Revisited

Sunday night on the last day of the season, and that's time to dust off my pre-season predictions, update them, and compare them to the reality as we know it.

Here's a recap of my pre-season predictions:

Red Sox (Yankees 2nd, Wild Card)
Royals (Twins 2nd)
Angels

Phillies (Braves 3rd)
Cubs (Astros 2nd, Wild Card)
Padres (Dodgers 2nd)

Red Sox over Angels in LCS
Astros over Cubs in LCS

Red Sox over Astros in 7 in WS

AL MVP: Vlad
AL Cy: Curt Schilling
AL ROY: "none of the above"

NL MVP: Albert Pujols
NY Cy: Roy Oswalt
NY ROY: Aaron Miles

OK, so I was really, really wrong with the Royals. Other than that, not bad.

So, what are my guesses for the post-season NOW?

The Twins will take the Yankees in four -- two Santana wins and a Radke win on the road.

Boston will beat Anaheim in four. The hidden weapon of Bronson Arroyo will combine with Curt Schilling to beat the depleted Angels, who won't quite be able to make it to their 7th-8th-9th-inning dominators with a lead.

Boston will beat the Twins in a hotly-contested seven-game LCS. With the rotations slightly off, the Twins may have a hard time making the most of their home-field advantage.

In the NL, Houston will easily beat the Braves in four games, as the fraudulent Braves rotation finally catches up with it and Clemens and Roy Oswalt continue their dominance of September.

St. Louis will have a hard time with the Dodgers but will win in five in historic slugfests. The St. Louis bullpen, however, will be run down in the process.

The Astros will shock everybody by beating St. Louis in the LCS in seven games. Garner's run and gun game will stymie the St. Louis team, and the weak St. Louis defense up the middle will prove to be the team's achilles heel.

And finally, in the World Series, I see a relatively easy Boston victory -- let's say six games just to be craven -- as the team's offensive depth and dominant 1-2 starting punch overcomes the finally-exhausted Roger Clemens. Jeff Bagwell will make a crucial error while the crowd at Fenway yells "Larry Anderson! Larry Anderson!" in the final game six.

Here's my picks for post-season hardware -- my ballot -- and predictions.

AL MVP

My pick - Mariano Rivera. Who will win: Vlad Guerrero.

Guerrero had a clutch 2-run homer in the division-deciding game Saturday, and that's usually what sends players over the edge. It's not just that Manny Ramirez wasn't possibly even the most valuable guy on his team -- I'd rate Curt Schilling and Johnny Damon ahead of him in terms of value to a winning way -- it's more like Manny had just another year like he usually has. So did Vlad, come to think of it, but it was a stellar year.

I find my ballot this year stuffed with a couple of starting pitchers - Curt Schilling and Johan Santana. "Most Valuable" of course isn't quite like Cy Young, which we award to the best pitching performance. I give Schilling extra marks for the way he commanded both the clubhouse and the fans in a way almost unique in modern baseball. And Santana simply made the Twins from an adequate ball club ito one that can contend.

But I picked Mariano Rivera because -- where on the earth would the Yanks be without him this year? Their pen was shaky, their rotation a shambles, the offense on again, off-again. The Yankees came from behind in half their wins this year. They blew two games in the eighth all year, though, both to the Red Sox.

My complete ballot of AL Most Valuable Player:

1. Mariano Rivera
2. Johnny Damon
3. Johan Santana
4. Vlad Guerrero
5. Curt Schilling
6. Gary Sheffield
7. Manny Ramirez
8. Travis Hafner
9. Mark Texeira
10. Melvin Mora

Additional comments:

As I've been agitating the last part of the year, I think Johnny Damon was the true sparkplug for the Red Sox, and everything that happened in that lineup that year was because the alpha and omega was, quite literally, Damon, who could get on, steal, and hit with power while playing very good defense. But his unique contribution to the success of his club was not nearly as unique as Rivera's.

Remember when the Yankees were about to sign Vlad Guerrero, but Steinbrenner intervened and insisted on Gary Sheffield instead? Sheffield was not only the Yankees' offensive leader, he was virtually the only player consistently good all year. He had "just another" typical Sheff year, like Vlad, but in terms of personality was far better a fit than the retiring Guerrero would have been in the Bronx.

Travis Hafner had a HUGE year this year -- he was second in OPS behind Manny Ramirez! The Cleveland team's brief flirtation with contention was in part due to CC Sabathia and Jake Westbrook (especially the latter), but Hafner's bat made the lineup from a pesky one into a dangerous one.

Similarly, Mark Texeira really broke out as had been predicted since the day he was drafted, and elevated Texas' lineup into a near-contender.

Finally, Melvin Mora had a terrific year, finishing fifth in OPS, batting .340, taking lots of extra bases, and in general keeping the Orioles respectable. The O's never did get close to contention this year -- too many pitching problems -- but without Mora they'd be cellar dwellers.


NL MVP

My pick: Barry Bonds. Who will win: Barry Bonds.

My pre-season pick, Albert Pujols, will probably finish second, since his fellow Cardinal candidates Scott Rolen and Jim Edmonds both missed stretches of time.

You simply can't make much of an argument against Barry. He kept his team in the race until the middle of the day on the last day of the season, and only Jason Schmidt of the same Giants provided as single-handed a contribution to a weak team.

My complete ballot:

1. Barry Bonds
2. Jason Schmidt
3. Carlos Beltran
4. Brad Lidge
5. Adrian Beltre
6. Eric Gagne
7. Albert Pujols
8. Scott Rolen
9. Roger Clemens
10. Carlos Zambrano
11. JD Drew

Additional Comments:

OK, this is another weird ballot. Five pitchers? It's because key pitching performances were the most important part of several teams' success. Schmidt, as mentioned above, was uniquely the only good pitcher on a team that nearly went into the playoffs. He played hurt, he went deep in the game, he came back on the last day of the season and pitched a gem. As much as Barry was a force unto himself in about 80% of the games his team played, Schmidt was about 50% of the pitching staff for SF this year.

I put Carlos Beltran in at number three, because the trade of Beltran coincided with the Astros' big comeback. Of course, it was closely followed by the firing of Jimy Williams and the hiring of Old School Phil Garner, who loves to run, and he set Beltran loose at the number 2 hole. Beltran smacked the ball around, he tracked down balls all over that huge center field at Enron/Minute Maid, and he stole third nearly as often as he stole second, coming to within a whisker of a 40/40 year combined between KC and Houston. It's hard not to think he made Biggio and Bagwell, batting on either side of him, that much better.

Brad Lidge was another mid-season promotee, promoted to closer from set-up man after the Astros traded Dotel to get Beltran. Lidge struck out a remarkable 153 batters, and went more than one inning for his saves a half dozen times. Dotel wasn't that dominant, nor even was Billy Wagner in his Houston heyday, not even to mention his Philly Phlop.

Adrian Beltre's breakout year saw him finish fifth in the league in OPS, playing every day in one of the more extreme pitcher's parks. He had virtually no strength around him in the lineup, unlike the Cardinalas and Astros (such as Lance Berkman, regrettably forced off my ballot by circumstance). He played outstanding defense that would be gold glove were it not for Scott Rolen's presence in the lineup in St. Louis.

As with the Giants and Bonds, it's hard to imagine the Dodgers lasting into October without Beltre, but it's even harder to imagine the Dodgers without Eric Gagne. Sure, he blew a couple of saves finally. But he also stepped it up when Guillermo Mota was traded and Darren Dreifort was hurt and Wilson Alvarez switched back into the rotation, and covered multiple-inning saves for the first time in two years. He may now be paying the price with shoulder wear and tear -- I only hope he isn't about to go the way of Bobby Thigpen -- but in sending the Dodgers to the playoffs, he has to be considered nearly as valuable to his team overall as Beltre.

Now my great favorite, Albert Pujols. Superlatives have been spread all over about Pujols, and overall he not only had the second-best offensive year in the league after Bonds, he played really great first base. But with all that help around him in the St. Louis lineup, it's difficult to point to him -- or any Cardinal -- as being truly an irreplaceable most-valuable player.

I put Rolen slightly behind Pujols in part because he benefitted from Pujols in front and Edmonds behind him, and in part because he missed a number of games down the stretch to injury (admittedly having no bearing on his team's success by that point). His defense remains historically great, and he had a career year, but it's hard to rank him among the league leaders when you lok at his company.

Clemems presence in Houston galvanized the community, the fan base, and the club. His steadfastness held the team afloat, and his September was incredible. He nearly got the start on the last day of the season, but for a case of stomach flu, and if he'd won the deciding game that might've rocketed up a notch or three, to coin a phrase. Roy Oswalt was pretty good, too, so Clemens was not nearly as important as Schmidt was to the Giants. But as with Curt Schilling on the Red Sox, the winning, championship attitude, despite the fact he rarely traveled with the club, seemed to be contagious.

Carlos Zambrano makes a surprise appearance at number ten on my list. Yes, the Cubs didn't make it. That was due to a variety of problems, not the least of which was lack of execution by the starting staff. But Zambrano was the exception. Cubs fans will probably stew over his wretched final start in the crucial last week o fhte season, but Carlos still managed to finish fourth in the league in ERA, pitched over 200 innings, and was a genuine stopper for a team often adrift.

Finally, I added an 11th guy to substitute for any of the pitchers above for those who might think I put too many pitchers on this list. JD Drew, traded in the off-season to the Braves, remarkably managed a whole year without some injury. He held down right field, finished eighth in OPS, and like the guy he replaced -- Gary Sheffield -- managed to be the only consistent hitter on a club that had as many problems as stars in its lineup. The Braves would be nowhere without Drew this year (albeit in a division full of nowhere teams this year).

AL Cy Young

My pick: Johan Santana. Who will win: Santana.

My ballot:

1. Santana
2. Curt Schilling
3. Mariano Rivera
4. Jake Westbrook
5. Joe Nathan

Man, I hate having two closers on this list, but there were all sorts of deficiencies with some of the usual candidates (e.g. Pedro Martinez), and Joe Nathan made the cut since this is about performance, not necessarily team value.

Santana's the no-brainer: lead the league in ERA, Stirkeouts, and just one behind in Wins. Schilling, as outlined above, was pretty valuable to his team, but his 228 innings were pretty dominant. Still, to put Santana's year into proper perspective, Schilling's ERA was 2/3 a run per appearance worse than Santana's. Rivera, as outlined above, had a fantastic year, digging deep when his team needed him the most and nearly always coming up big, and ended up with an historic 53 saves. Finally, Jake Westbook finished third in the league in ERA, and while his win and K totals will probably mean in real life he won't get any Cy Votes, if you watched him pitch, you could see that he was the cream of the crop.

NL Cy Young:

My pick: Roger Clemens. Who will win: Roger Clemens.

My ballot:

1. Clemens
2. Jason Schmidt
3. Randy Johnson
4. Ben Sheets
5. Oliver Perez

A case can be made for Randy Johnson on performance, and Randy's certainly been lobbying for the award. He pitched a perfect game for a lousy defensive team, and with a 2.60 ERA (second in the league behind Jake Peavy, who only pitched 166 IP due to injury and a short leash) for an incredible 245 IP. But Randy's performances seemed hollow on a last-place team, and this was no 1972 Steve Carlton. It was an extremely good pitcher having an extremely good year but one which can't quite be called the best pitching performance of the year, because there was no pressure.

Clemens, on the other hand, was hailed as a dual messiah in Houston, and after Andy Pettite proved the Yankees knew something when they let him go, stepped up to the rubber with a vengeance. He finished fifth in ERA, fifth in strikeouts, and pretty remarkably, eight in IP over the cours of the year. His win total was helped early on by some luck and hurt in the middle when his bullpen ate a few games. What I find truly champion about this year was it was Clemens' first in the NL. Hitters are supposedly on the short end the first time they see a pitcher, so that might've helped, but the way Clemens picked apart hitters was as if he'd been pitching against them for twenty years intead of the AL. And he did all this in a notorious hitter's park. Not bad for an old man.

Readers will note I left off a couple of relievers off my Cy Young list that were on my "most valuable" list, closers Brad Lidge and Eric Gagne. In terms of overall performance, I think a closer has to be truly exceptional in terms of dominance. Lidge only had a half a year, and Gagne did not quite have the kind of campaign he had last year relative to the quality of the starters.

Ben Sheets and Oliver Perez, however, had fantastic years for bad teams. Sheets was second in the league in ERA at 2.70, just behind Johnson, also with bad defense behind him, pitched 237 IP, and was second in the league in Ks with 264 (just ahead of Schmidt, who had three fewer starts). Perez finished fourth in Ks, was sixth in ERA, and managed 12 wins on a club with no offense, mediocre defense, and no pen. He was aided a bit by the pitcher's park, and only pitched 196 IP -- it's possible had he made the half-dozen starts he missed, he'd've done better or worse.

I left off Jake Peavy, the league ERA champ, largely because of his low (166) IP total in 27 starts. That's about 3/4 of a great year, but you don't get on my Cy Young ballot if you can't contribute most of the year.

AL Manager of the Year

My pick: Joe Torre. Who will win: Buck Showalter

1. Joe Torre
2. Terry Francona
3. Buck Showalter

Hunh? Celebrated Red Sox fan Crank gives MOY honors to the Yankees' skipper?

You betcha. The Yankees finished an incredible 12 games above their Pythagorean numbers. That's on the border of unprecedented. The starting rotation was everywhere. The offense floundered. Need I mention - George Steinbrenner. Good god, all that and the Yankees still managed to win 101 games. That's an incredible job by someone, and you just have to give Props to Torre on this one.

Francona took his team to just one over its expected W-L record, but it could have been far worse the way New Englanders love to panic. He remained calm, handled the press well, and in general dealt with his many head cases in a way which maximized the situation. He managed to fit into Theo-Ball philosophy quite well after the assumption that his hiring was a sinecure to get Schilling to sign. Good job, Terry.

So, Showalter really probably deserves a lot of the credit for the success of Texas. Getting rid of A-Rod got rid of a guy who made a big black hole in the clubhouse, and the dominant Type A Showalter took charge after he was gone. Texas was a couple of games above its Pythagorean, but all that performance came from somewhere. This is the third team that has improved remarkably after Showalter took the helm -- the Yankees and Diamondbacks were the others, and they won championships the year after Showalter was fired. He just might get a chance to ride the Texas hoss all the way this time, about 2006 or 2007 depending on how much ownership cooperates in the quest for pitching.

NL Manager of the Year

My pick: Phil Garner. Who Will Win: Bobby Cox

1. Garner
2. Felipe Alou
3. Jim Tracy

So I completely disagree with Garner's approach to strategy, tactics, on-field management, off-field management, and I've always disliked his acerbic personality dating back to his playing days. But you just cannot argue with the fact he took over an underachieving club and lead it to the playoffs. He had a little help from the front office with the acquisition of Carlos Beltran, but he also managed a depleted bullpen after Dotel left and a mess of a rotation. Great job.

I've given a lot of credit to Jason Schmidt and Barry Bonds in the writings above, but perhaps Felipe Alou deserves as much credit. The Giants, even with their two stars, just didn't have a lot of talent, particularly on the pitching staff. Yet they finished a half dozen games above their Pythagorean prediction. Felipe stuck with guys like Matt Herges a bit too long, and overused his bullpen and overstretched Schmidt and overbabied Bonds, but all that said, he managed to control his clubhouse and keep his team in it. It's a pity Alou did not have more to work with during the latter period of the Expos, and it's going to be a pity that this is as good a team as he's going to get for quite a while in SF.

Finally, I think Jim Tracy's job in LA has been much underrated. A lot of the attention mid-season was paid to the unpopular trade of Paul LoDuca and Guillermo Mota, but Tracy incorporated the changes and went along with the program in a big way. His pitching rotation was a complete mess for much of the year, and his middle relief didn't help, and the lineup wasn't that much better than last year's historically awful one. The last week was brutal. But the Dodgers hung on and finished three games above the expected mark, and that was the margin for the division. I'll give Tracy credit for those games.

AL Rookie of the Year

I think frankly ROY is a dumb award, in part because of the arbitrariness of who qualifies, an in part because of its almost nil predictive value for the career of the award winners. At the beginning of the year, I chose "none of the above" as the winner in the AL, and you know, that's pretty much what we got. Bobby Crosby will win because he was an everyday player playing a respectable shortstop and he lead rookies in the traditional offensive stats of RBI and Runs and HR.

NL Rookie of the Year

Jason Bay will and should win, despite missing a few weeks to injury. Khalil Greene had a great showing defensively at shortstop for the Padres, and like Crosby might've won by default had not his season ended a bit early due to injury and a better candidate in Bay appeared.

AL Executive of the Year

Theo Epstein. The Garciaparra trade was ballsy and spot on what the club needed, and managing the press in Boston is a job unto itself.

NL Executive of the Year

Paul DePodesta. The LoDuca trade worked out in this sense: Lo Duca and Mota did nothing for the Marlins, and the Marlins themselves could only manage a third place after acquiring them. Much was made of not luring the prima donnaish Randy Johnson, who would've been an impact pitcher for the post-season, but DePodesta protected his future. And nailing Steve Finley was pretty critical to besting the Padres, who had no other alternatives at CF; perhaps one of the best defensive trades in memory. In the process, the Dodgers cut pay roll and set an attendance record. He might not have wanted to have been the center of attention, but he handled it with aplomb and that gets a gold star from me.

posted by The Crank 9:26 PM

BASEBALL AT ITS BEST WHEN DOWN TO WIRE


By Diane M. Grassi

In 2003 we enjoyed one of the most exciting post-seasons in many years, and in 2004 we were treated to one of the most suspense filled regular season-ending finishes with several playoff spots on the line until the last day. It was a great week just to be a baseball fan regardless of where one’s loyalties lie.

Going to the playoffs this year will be the perennial favorites, such as the New York Yankees and the Atlanta Braves, but the Yankees end this year with a shaky starting pitching rotation and the Braves had a less than impressive 1st half. The most dominant club all season, of those going to the first round of the playoffs, is the St. Louis Cardinals, although their pitching staff has raised questions for the past couple of weeks. Seemingly the Twins won the American League Central division sneaking under the radar, which is the way they like it. And in contrast, the Boston Red Sox, the American League Wild Card winner, acted like they won the pennant when they clinched the Wild Card earlier in the week.

The Anaheim Angels were battling all season with either the Texas Rangers or Oakland Athletics for both the American League West title and later the AL Wild Card title and none of them were dominant over the other all year. This necessitated another nail biter the last weekend of the season with the Angels beating the A’s, winning two out of three, giving them the American League West title. Perhaps it was the injured players which the Angels had to deal with most of the season who made it back the past few weeks which was the difference, as Oakland started having injury problems late and Texas, as good as they were all season, finally ran out of steam.

The Los Angeles Dodgers could never put enough distance between themselves and the San Francisco Giants and had to battle it out against San Fran on the next to the last day of the season to put a lid on it and win the National League West. Meanwhile, the Chicago Cubs played like a fast sinking hot air balloon. During that time the Houston Astros played as remarkably well as the Cubs played poorly. The Astros won 15 of their last 16 games and 18 in a row at home (not accomplished by a MLB team in ten years), to become one of the most surprising clubs to come back from the dead at such a late point in the season in many, many years.

After the All-Star break the Astros went on a two-week losing streak and took a nosedive while trying to adjust to a new manager as Jimy Williams was dismissed after his All-Star Game coaching duties, and replaced by Phil Garner. They also lost the services of starting pitcher, Andy Pettitte, for the remainder of the season in August due to elbow surgery. Their bullpen too was shaken up by trading Octavio Dotel to the Oakland A’s and gambling on Brad Lidge, becoming a closer for the first time.

Prior to August the only bright light on the club was Roger Clemens, who was carrying the whole team on his back. He went on to win 18 games while losing only four, but wound up with 11 no-decisions in which he pitched under seven innings only three of those times. Most of his wins as well as no-decisions were pitching clinics in the art of pitching, with many including double digit strikeout totals and a very limited amount of hits allowed. Had Clemens had a run-generating club behind him he could have easily won over 20 games but ends up in the top five in ERA in the National League at 2.98 and with 218 strikeouts.

It was not until Roy Oswalt, considered to be the ace of the pitching staff in Houston when the season began, started getting it together that the Astros finally came on strong in August. Oswalt finished winning 20 games, losing 10 with 206 strikeouts and 3rd in innings pitched in the National League. And then finally the roster of Astros veterans, looking lack-luster all season, started to hit. Jeff Kent, Craig Biggio, Jeff Bagwell, and mid-season pickup, Carlos Beltran all found their rhythm.

The Houston Astros have nothing to lose in their appearance in the playoffs. After their wheels came off in July, no one in baseball expected them to make a go of it, disappointingly so given their hopes in the beginning of the season.

While the last two World Series Champions were both Wild Card teams, the Anaheim Angels and the Florida Marlins respectively, they weren’t expected to wind up in the post-season. In Houston’s case, they were first considered contenders and then management was actually contemplating dismantling the team mid-season in an attempt to rebuild for 2005. In that sense, they are more of a surprise than the Angels or the Marlins were. Especially unexpected was the poor performance of the Cubs. Similarly the Giants never dominated all season, and came on with too little too late.

So after all is said and done, the stage is set for a MLB playoffs season with no sure winners and more parity than we may be used to than in the past. More importantly it lends itself for great theater on the diamond with possible surprising upsets. And you can’t ask for any more from this game of baseball which takes on new meaning every October, weaving new stories of hope and disappointment, always leaving us rooting for more.

posted by Diane M. Grassi 7:07 PM

One Man Show

Another year, no ring for Barry. On the other hand, the Giants were in the race for 161 games. According to Peter Gammons the Giants have been eliminated for 12 games over the past 8 years. Now take into account the talent on these teams, according to Tim Kurkjian, Barry Bonds is going to be one of the few Hall of Famers all time to have gone his entire career without playing with another Hall of Famer. To tell the truth, I think that Jeff "Truck Wash" Kent will eventually make the hallowed halls of Cooperstown, but overall Barry hasn't had much to shout about. The 12 games in 8 years is amazing.

posted by David 4:18 PM