85205277

by

Yahoo! News – Timothy White, Billboard Editor, Dies

Okay, I’ve not posted much lately, and now I dive back in with some very un-fantasy-like posts.

For about 24 hours once, perhaps 15 years ago, I felt like I was friends with Tim White. I had cocktails with him one evening, during which he turned me onto the darkest, oddest and catchiest roots reggae band I’ve ever heard (Ras Michael and the Sons of Negus, check them out), and then talked with him at his book party the next night at Private Eyes, a goofily futuristic nightclub of the time (1985 or thereabouts) that featured, well, a lot of video screens showing videos.

I’d always admired his writing at Rolling Stone, but my brush with greatness went no further. I don’t think we were ever again in the same room, though I’ve turned many onto Ras Michael over the years. But his passing, by heart attack, in his office at Billboard at 50 seems far sadder than John Entwhistle’s nearly simultaneous passing by heart attack at 57 in his hotel room just before the Who kicked off their latest reunion tour in Las Vegas, simply because there’s this somewhat personal connection.

Of course, that brings us to Darryl Kile. I had no idea Darryl Kile was such a great guy. Was this common knowledge out here in fan-land? Because if it was I missed it.

Back to the personal. It isn’t that I had no connection to Entwhistle. The Who at Forest Hills (with Patti LaBelle) on the Who’s Next tour was probably the best big rock show I’ve ever seen, and I cut out of high school the day The Kids are Alright premiered in New York City, taking the train in from the suburbs to see the first show on the first day at the arty theater on East 57th Street at which it premiered. It was a kickass crowd of other fans who saw no reason to go to school when the Who had a movie opening.

But Darryl Kile… The only thing I can say is that Darryl Kile seems to have lived the life. His friends say he was loyal and forthright, honest and true, and he suffered when he was unable to make things go the way he wanted them to. But he also prevailed so that things went most of the way he wanted, and he left behind a trail of love that should be the envy of anyone.

He died too young, yet I can’t think of anyone else whose accounts were in better balance. Death sucks, but nothing else helps us put living in perspective, does it?

85205217

by

ESPN.com – MLB – Box Score

I didn’t dig into the Kent-Bond brouhaha the other day. Bonds said it was a non-issue, we always knew the two weren’t buds, big deal.

But what I know is that years ago, when Bonds and Kent became teammates, it was clear that Kent would benefit greatly by having Bonds hitting in front of him. And he clearly has.

And today, with Bonds hitting behind him, Kent benefitted again.

85175627

by

ESPN.com – MLB – Scoreboard

I noticed that Luis Gonzalez, Wiki Gonzalez and Alex Gonzalez all hit homers today and wondered what the record was for most guys with the same last name hitting homers on the same day?

As you know I’ve been kind of tied up, but I did try to post on Friday. Blogger ate my home work. Whenever that happens I swear I will save every post before I post, and I do, for a while. But then nothing bad happens and I get lazy and blammo. Blogger is really a great system, but it’s not terribly reliable. That doesn’t make it less great, it just means one has to make adjustments.

It seems that since the end of April, when I advised someone to take Jay Gibbons over the then very much struggling Tim Salmon, Salmon has been a substantially better ballplayer. How much better?

AB H AVG R HR RBI SB
Salmon: 126 43 .341 26 8 27 4
Gibbons: 112 26 .232 14 3 16 0

Since I compiled these stats Salmon has dinged twice, Gibbons once.

The fact is I got it wrong. Salmon had been pathetic for so long I violated rule number one, which is Don’t ever underestimate the capability of vets with track records to resurrect their careers. You could also call it the Gary Gaetti rule. Or the Vinny Castilla rule.

I like taking credit when I get something right. Well, this one I got wrong. Sorry.

LaRussa on Mark McGwire

by

So, what I’m wondering is this:

Tony LaRussa says Mark McGwire took no steroids. But Mark McGwire says he took andro, which helps promote the growth of the body’s own hormones at steroidal levels. The two years or so McGwire took andro his injury wracked body become suddenly quite resilient and he broke Roger Maris’ record.

McGwire stopped taking andro because of the hue and cry about it and soon had to retire because his andro-less body was unable to sustain the strain.

I know that doesn’t in any causal way prove anything, but shouldn’t it be talked about as much or more than the goofy anecdote about Brady Anderson’s 50 homer year? Wouldn’t it be interesting to hear McGwire’s take on this, or La Russa’s?

BTW, while I personally wouldn’t take anything that made my testicle shrink to the size of peas, especially if it made me prone to rages and zit-faced self-hatred (hey, been there and done that naturally a long time ago), it’s hard for me to see how the lines between allowed and disallowed performance enhancing techniques aren’t always going to be blurred. Banning the drugs seems like a simple thing, but it isn’t going to make the problem go away.

As Malcom Gladwell said to Rob Neyer last week, the reason Barry Bonds can say unequivocably that he doesn’t take steroids is because he doesn’t. Steroids are last year’s or last generations performance enhancer. If Bonds is taking something it’s something newer, something harder to detect, something that may be found naturally in the body. And no doubt when the testers figure out how to figure out what and how much of it there are, Bonds (or whomever is actually taking performance enhancing drugs, because we don’t really know) will have moved onto something else.

I’m not saying that everything should be mindlessly allowed, but there are a deep philosophical and practical issues that are begging for resolution. Banning whatever isn’t going to much difference at all without that.

A reader writes about road saves

by

A reader wrote in today about yesterday’s mlb.com column:

Rotoman,

Save Me’s hypothesis about why closers get more saves on the road is wrong. The plain fact of the matter is that closers get more saves on the road because the home team can not get a save if they go into the ninth tied or behind or the game goes into extra innings. The visitors always have the possibility for a save no matter what the game situation. As I am sure you are aware of this, I thought maybe you could dispel this crazy notion that managers only put closers into save situations on the road. Overanalyzed hogwash was indeed Save Me’s theory. Thanks.

It didn’t actually occur to me that Save Me was saying that closers got more saves on the road for any reason other than the obvious one. If you have a lead as the visiting team in the ninth inning, you have a save situation. I think Save Me was implying that managers are more likely to use their closer in a tie game in the ninth when they’re at home, because from that point on there will be no save situation for a winning home team.

But whatever. If anyone was unclear on this they shouldn’t be. Closers get more saves on the road for structural reasons, not because of any changeable usage issues.

And while I’m at it about yesterday’s mlb.com column, it had one of those gotcha’s. I expressed my full confidence in the column that Keith Foulke would get it together, and he was then summarily dismissed from his job as closer. Everyone is saying he’s going to get the job back, he just needs to get back on track. If you own him, don’t dump him. If you covet him, I don’t think his price could get much cheaper.

85162968

by

MLB.com Fantasy: Ask Rotoman

The new column is up at mlb.com. In one of the questions a reader asked about a strategy of sitting closers when they’re at home. He rightly ascertained that closers save about 55 percent of their games on the road. It also turns out that they win nearly all their games at home.

All of which is interesting, but not very useful in roto leagues. But he plays in a league that allows free substitution, but limits the number of days relievers can be on the roster. So, by taking an extra closer and rotating these guys in only when they’re on the road, he gains a five percent edge in saves.

It also turns out his league counts Losses, and closers lose more games than they win, and they lose most of them at home, too. Another reason to sit them when they’re at home.

This type of research and thinking is essential in games that allow free substitution. It isn’t that a five percent edge is always going to work out, but if it comes without additional cost you’d be crazy not to exploit it.

85159765

by

MLB.com Fantasy: Rotoman’s Dollar Values

The dollar values for May are finally posted at mlb.com. I delivered them late and my editor graciously did not bite my head off.

I’m trying to keep up with your questions but I am failing right now. I have too many hours of work to finish each day to be able to take the time to answer all emails individually. You will find answers to some of your questions in the mlb.com column that appears tomorrow,.

Thanks for writing.

85153380

by

ESPN.com: MLB – Reds add Branyan in trade with Indians

Lot’s of Reds news today. Last night Junior Griffey’s right hamstring locked up. That’s not the hammy that knocked him out of large parts of 2000 and 2001. It’s also not as bad a strain, according to the Reds’ trainer, as it could be. But Junior sounds frustrated and he hasn’t shown much resilience bouncing back from whatever cuts him down.

And anyway, since he’s come back none of the Reds’ outfielders have been hitting.

Bob Boone says Branyan will be a pinch-hitter utility guy, which makes a certain amount of sense. “In the sixth inning you don’t worry so much about the strikeout,” Boone said, “but you do like the homer.”

How is it that Dave Kingman got all those at bats?

85144452

by

The new column is up at mlb.com. I think, I haven’t gone to check.

Too busy on the football magazine. I think I lost a number of reader questions last week. If you didn’t get an answer, that’s why. They were in the queue one day and then I couldn’t find them. My hosting service changed mail servers, so that might explain it partly. I didn’t get mail for a full day.

Feel free to write again. I’m trying to answer all of them individually, though I can’t promise.