This season is strange, no doubt about it. The Indians and Tigers have been leading a division normally owned by the Twins and/or White Sox, 3 managers have lost or quit their jobs before the All-Star Break, some of the biggest names in the sport are plunking their millionaire behinds on the bench with injuries for an extended amount of time, A. J. Burnett became the first Yankee to strike out 4 batters in an inning, and Troy Tulowitzki hit a baseball twice with one swing. So, there's definitely something odd about this season.
But the most surprising thing about the 2011 season?
The Pittsburgh Pirates are over .500 approaching the middle of the year.
Read that a couple more times, it probably won't sink in if you read it just once.
Yes, somehow, the Pirates are quickly erasing their 18-year streak of futility (the longest any professional sports team has gone without a single winning record in a season) by playing effective baseball this late in a season for the first time since the last decade. True, they're 4 games behind the division-leading Brewers and 3 games behind the Cardinals, and they're above the Cubs and Astros, two other underperforming teams that are doing just that. But the Reds, who won the division last season, are tied for 3rd with the most surprising team this year. Now, it's still highly unlikely that we'll be seeing the Bucs sail their ship into the stormy postseason seas, but as we like to say here at TBF, stranger things have certainly happened.
It really shouldn't be this surprising that these Pirates are doing everything they can to make the fans forget about the last 2 decades. They've got a young, powerful lineup led by Andrew McCutchen (one of the best all-around center fielders in the game), Jose Tabata, and Lyle Overbay, who at 34 years of age is playing like a kid half that old. Even though they don't rank higher than 22th in any statistical category, when they are hitting, it's at the perfect time. Their pitching isn't terribly impressive either, even though they rank 9th overall in ERA, but the offseason addition of Kevin Correia (9-6, 3.65) had an impressive 7-4 record before the end of May, and has helped rev up a starting rotation that was dead last year. The bullpen might be one of the biggest reasons Pittsburgh is finally paying attention to their baseball team again: closer Joel Hanrahan has 22 saves (1 other closer has 23, a handful have 22, and most have less than that), and over half of the relievers have an ERA below or around 3.5. These stats may not sound terribly impressive...and that's because they aren't. If this were the Yankees, or the Phillies, we would wonder what the heck happened to them. But this is the Pirates. You have to cut them some slack. A lot of slack, actually. You don't go straight from 18 years of utterly poor playing to winning the division in one season. What this shows is that this Pirates team will be around for a while (almost all the position players are 28 or younger), and that they have what it takes to finally bring some pride back to the Steel(ers) City. All of this could be said about the Nationals, another team that normally lurks in the cellar but seems to have found new life this year: these teams won't be competing for playoff spots this season, but next year, who knows? Pirates-Nationals could be the NLCS of 2012 or 2013, if things keep getting better for these subpar teams.
Sunday, June 26, 2011
Monday, June 20, 2011
The King Is Injured! Long Play The King!
In a season that's already seen so many ups and downs for the man touted as the best player of this generation, Cardinals first baseman and superstar Albert Pujols sustained a fractured left wrist from Royals infielder Wilson Betemit yesterday in interleague play. While the injury seemed minor at first, tests were done and it appears that Pujols will miss 4-6 weeks.
If he were a fringe player, we wouldn't be concerned. If he were a fan favorite but not much else, we still wouldn't be concerned. If he was a big star, we'd notice, but still might not be concerned. But this is Albert Pujols. This is, as I said, the best player of this generation. Not only that, this is the best player of this generation...who's in the last year of his contract and will be a free agent at the end of this season, possibly the most sought-after free agent in years. This is one of those rare players that can completely change a franchise forever. He's become the face of the Cardinals, gaining the kind of popularity and respect in that organization reserved for players like Ozzie Smith, Bob Gibson, Stan Musial and Rogers Hornsby. Mind you, those are all Hall of Fame Players who are spoken of in almost revered tones. Only halfway through his already celebrated career, Pujols is one of the most important and popular players in the game. So an injury to him is not just bad. It's catastrophic.
Look at it this way: in 10 full seasons, he's never hit under .312 (career .329 average), never sent less than 32 baseballs into the cheap seats, and never batted in less than 116 runs in any year. This year, he was on pace to do .279/38/100. For any other player, those are MVP-caliber stats. For Albert Pujols, that's underperforming. Not even slightly underperforming, that's a noticeable dip. Is there still any doubt how much he impacts his team, his league, his sport? There really shouldn't be. However, missing two months would crush a regular man's season, and it certainly won't do much good in Albert's quest to salvage his and the Cardinals' playoff hopes. This is a team that already lost their best pitcher, Adam Wainwright, before the season even began. Take their best position player out of the mix as well, and you're looking at a unbeatable force that just had its weakness discovered. This is a blowup more monumental than the Padres' 10-game losing streak late last season that cost them the division and the playoffs. Sure, Lance Berkman (who will most likely take over the cold corner in Pujols' absence while fourth outfielder John Jay gets the nod in right field) and a healthy Matt Holliday are still around to power the offense, and with Colby Rasmus expected to get hot, as well as the somewhat anticipated return of David Freese from the DL fast approaching, this is a Cardinals team that may be able to survive through the Period Without Pujols. However, the chances of them somehow powering past the red-hot Brewers and the heating-up Reds without The Machine seem to be slim.
Of course, all of this is besides the point. This is a walk year for El Hombre. Not that he would walk away from the city that so gladly and willingly embraced him, nor would he want to. But if the money isn't right (pressure from the players' union for him to sign a contract that tops Alex Rodriguez's 10-year, $275 million monstrosity is mounting at a feverish pace), it most likely will be good elsewhere. Many speculate that, if he does not stay a Redbird, he'll find a new roost in Chicago (who only have hit-or-miss Carlos Pena contracted through this season), and there are plenty of other cities that would love to house this golden goose. But an injury that could sideline him through most of the remainder of this year, and one that would make his stats take a nosedive after already being in freefall for most of the first half, might surprisingly tarnish his otherwise spotless reputation. Chances are extremely high that this won't make a difference to most teams interested in him, but it does show that even gods can bleed. And no one wants to think of Superman breaking his arm, especially to a minor villain like Wilson Betemit (who?).
So, Alberto, you're in our hearts and thoughts...just not in our starting fantasy lineups for a while.
If he were a fringe player, we wouldn't be concerned. If he were a fan favorite but not much else, we still wouldn't be concerned. If he was a big star, we'd notice, but still might not be concerned. But this is Albert Pujols. This is, as I said, the best player of this generation. Not only that, this is the best player of this generation...who's in the last year of his contract and will be a free agent at the end of this season, possibly the most sought-after free agent in years. This is one of those rare players that can completely change a franchise forever. He's become the face of the Cardinals, gaining the kind of popularity and respect in that organization reserved for players like Ozzie Smith, Bob Gibson, Stan Musial and Rogers Hornsby. Mind you, those are all Hall of Fame Players who are spoken of in almost revered tones. Only halfway through his already celebrated career, Pujols is one of the most important and popular players in the game. So an injury to him is not just bad. It's catastrophic.
Look at it this way: in 10 full seasons, he's never hit under .312 (career .329 average), never sent less than 32 baseballs into the cheap seats, and never batted in less than 116 runs in any year. This year, he was on pace to do .279/38/100. For any other player, those are MVP-caliber stats. For Albert Pujols, that's underperforming. Not even slightly underperforming, that's a noticeable dip. Is there still any doubt how much he impacts his team, his league, his sport? There really shouldn't be. However, missing two months would crush a regular man's season, and it certainly won't do much good in Albert's quest to salvage his and the Cardinals' playoff hopes. This is a team that already lost their best pitcher, Adam Wainwright, before the season even began. Take their best position player out of the mix as well, and you're looking at a unbeatable force that just had its weakness discovered. This is a blowup more monumental than the Padres' 10-game losing streak late last season that cost them the division and the playoffs. Sure, Lance Berkman (who will most likely take over the cold corner in Pujols' absence while fourth outfielder John Jay gets the nod in right field) and a healthy Matt Holliday are still around to power the offense, and with Colby Rasmus expected to get hot, as well as the somewhat anticipated return of David Freese from the DL fast approaching, this is a Cardinals team that may be able to survive through the Period Without Pujols. However, the chances of them somehow powering past the red-hot Brewers and the heating-up Reds without The Machine seem to be slim.
Of course, all of this is besides the point. This is a walk year for El Hombre. Not that he would walk away from the city that so gladly and willingly embraced him, nor would he want to. But if the money isn't right (pressure from the players' union for him to sign a contract that tops Alex Rodriguez's 10-year, $275 million monstrosity is mounting at a feverish pace), it most likely will be good elsewhere. Many speculate that, if he does not stay a Redbird, he'll find a new roost in Chicago (who only have hit-or-miss Carlos Pena contracted through this season), and there are plenty of other cities that would love to house this golden goose. But an injury that could sideline him through most of the remainder of this year, and one that would make his stats take a nosedive after already being in freefall for most of the first half, might surprisingly tarnish his otherwise spotless reputation. Chances are extremely high that this won't make a difference to most teams interested in him, but it does show that even gods can bleed. And no one wants to think of Superman breaking his arm, especially to a minor villain like Wilson Betemit (who?).
So, Alberto, you're in our hearts and thoughts...just not in our starting fantasy lineups for a while.
Saturday, June 18, 2011
A Brief Exposition Of Random Musings Regarding The 2011 Season Thus Far (Part 3).
If Mets shortstop Jose Reyes keeps playing the way he's playing, he won't be playing in New York for much longer (or, if he does, it'll be a different NY on his cap). After rumors surfaced that the flailing, defending world champion Giants were interested in trading for Reyes were quelled, there has been much discussion whether a trade that would benefit both Reyes and the Mets, or Reyes simply signing elsewhere this upcoming offseason is more likely to occur. The way Mets owner Fred Wilpon unloaded on his organization a few weeks ago, Reyes playing elsewhere come next season seems almost a done deal. And I couldn't help but think he'd look great in pinstripes.
Has anyone noticed that Yovani Gallardo has an 8-1 record? What about Shaun Marcum with 83 strikeouts? We've been paying so much attention to Zack Greinke since his return from the DL, that we forgot there are two other incredibly competent aces in the Brewers' rotation. In fact, Gallardo leads the team in wins, while Marcum leads in ERA and strikeouts. These guys need more attention.
I love interleague play. There, I said it. I don't get why so many people dislike it. It provides us with interesting matchups between teams that wouldn't play each other anyway, which is a refreshing change of pace after seeing the Mets and Braves play each other 18 times. Also, you just know there's a potential World Series preview in one of those series. Sure, it's probably not the White Sox-Diamondbacks matchup (although I must admit, I am enjoying the Padres-Twins series, considering I predicted that as my long-shot World Series matchup last year and both teams are doing so poorly this season) that's going to be happening in late October, but a Brewers-Yankees series? A Rockies-Indians matchup? A Phillies-Red Sox series, which many have and still predict WILL be what we see in the Fall Classic? The way this season is going, any of these could be it. But that's why it's so cool to see interleague play, regardless of what the so-called "baseball purists" say.
Edwin Rodriguez, the coach who took over the managerial duties of the Florida Marlins after Fredi Gonzalez was fired last season, took a preemptive measure against his own job security and resigned this weekend amidst a 17 losses out of 18 games skid by his team. He's the second manager to be out of a job this season, after the Atheletics fired manager Bob Geren. Baseball is notoriously horrendous when it comes to manager turnover: while the likes of George Steinbrenner are gone, it's still far too easy for a manager to be used as a sacrificial lamb when his team's not doing well. I'm not saying that it's necessarily unjustified; a team is only as good as the people leading it. You can have an All-Star at every position, but if the manager doesn't know what he's doing, the team will make the Pirates look like the Yankees. However, it's also not great for a team to have 2 or 3 different kinds of managerial styles to get used to in the span of 1 or 2 seasons. If the team can't get behind, or get used to, a manager before he's booted out the door, it can affect the day-to-day as much as the overall state of the team. There's a very delicate balance that has to be found, and it seems like most general managers or owners can't seem to get it right yet.
This blog must be jinxed. Every time I talk about someone doing well or awful, they almost immediately begin to do the opposite. Therefore, I feel that I'm personally responsible for Derek Jeter's injury and subsequent placement on the DL, pausing his quest for 3,000. Jeet, I'm sorry.
I love interleague play. There, I said it. I don't get why so many people dislike it. It provides us with interesting matchups between teams that wouldn't play each other anyway, which is a refreshing change of pace after seeing the Mets and Braves play each other 18 times. Also, you just know there's a potential World Series preview in one of those series. Sure, it's probably not the White Sox-Diamondbacks matchup (although I must admit, I am enjoying the Padres-Twins series, considering I predicted that as my long-shot World Series matchup last year and both teams are doing so poorly this season) that's going to be happening in late October, but a Brewers-Yankees series? A Rockies-Indians matchup? A Phillies-Red Sox series, which many have and still predict WILL be what we see in the Fall Classic? The way this season is going, any of these could be it. But that's why it's so cool to see interleague play, regardless of what the so-called "baseball purists" say.
Edwin Rodriguez, the coach who took over the managerial duties of the Florida Marlins after Fredi Gonzalez was fired last season, took a preemptive measure against his own job security and resigned this weekend amidst a 17 losses out of 18 games skid by his team. He's the second manager to be out of a job this season, after the Atheletics fired manager Bob Geren. Baseball is notoriously horrendous when it comes to manager turnover: while the likes of George Steinbrenner are gone, it's still far too easy for a manager to be used as a sacrificial lamb when his team's not doing well. I'm not saying that it's necessarily unjustified; a team is only as good as the people leading it. You can have an All-Star at every position, but if the manager doesn't know what he's doing, the team will make the Pirates look like the Yankees. However, it's also not great for a team to have 2 or 3 different kinds of managerial styles to get used to in the span of 1 or 2 seasons. If the team can't get behind, or get used to, a manager before he's booted out the door, it can affect the day-to-day as much as the overall state of the team. There's a very delicate balance that has to be found, and it seems like most general managers or owners can't seem to get it right yet.
This blog must be jinxed. Every time I talk about someone doing well or awful, they almost immediately begin to do the opposite. Therefore, I feel that I'm personally responsible for Derek Jeter's injury and subsequent placement on the DL, pausing his quest for 3,000. Jeet, I'm sorry.
Saturday, June 11, 2011
The Old Switcheroo?
There have been initial talks about switching a National League team to the American League, finally balancing out the 16 NL teams and 14 AL teams to an even 15. This would in turn lead to 5 playoff spots in each league during the postseason as opposed to the 4, with a one-game playoff between the two wild card teams seemingly inevitable should this all come to pass.
While many players, managers and fans may not agree with this, giving both leagues the same number of teams might bring a parity to the game that hasn't really existed since the expansion teams of the 90s and the creation of the Central division. The question is, what team makes the switch? And does it geographically make sense for a team to do so? If we here at TBF had to guess, we would say that a team from the NL Central (only division in the game with 6 teams) would make the jump to the AL West (only division in the game with 4 teams). There have been rumors that the Houston Astros could make the switch, thereby instituting a slightly more interesting rivalry with the Texas Rangers. However, being in the same division or league might make the matchup a little less interesting (who cares about watching a Phillies-Pirates matchup? Exactly). Then there's the idea of maybe moving one of the NL teams to make more geographical sense for switching to the AL. Take the Astros and move them to Nevada? The Las Vegas Gamblers? Hey, stranger things have happened (the Montreal Expos?). Hell, the city of Milwaukee has had both of these things happen to it: the Braves left for Atlanta in the 60s, and then the Brewers, who started out as an AL team, made the switch to the NL in 1998. Or, they could always move a team from the AL Central to the AL West, then switch an NL Central team over to the AL Central. But, again, which team makes the switch? The team closest to being in the West would be the Royals, and they're in the heartland of the Central geographically. Or, even more ridiculously, they could simply create 2 more teams in the AL, one in the West and one in the Central to match the NL counterparts. The Oklahoma Plains? The Utah Salts? All right, if it happened, the teams would have better names, but we're just speculating here.
Now, it wouldn't necessarily be prudent or even sensible to make this kind of move. Baseball fans and everyone involved in the sport haven't seemed to mind the imbalance in the number of teams, and the playoff structure has been such that an equal number of teams make it to the postseason despite there being 2 extra teams in the NL. However, if the plans to add a second wild card in both leagues gets accepted (which all indications are pointing to it coming to pass after this or next season), it would only make sense to have 15 teams in both leagues. 5 teams in each division, 1 winner in each division then 2 open spots for any 2 teams that didn't win their respective divisions, 1 game playoff between the two wild cards, and on from there. Not only does it spice up the postseason, it gives a better sense of balance and fairness: in the NL, 2 more teams lose out on a chance at the playoffs every year than in the AL, whereas if they had the same number of teams, there would be a slightly fairer chance for every team (aside from the Cubs, let's face it). As far as this extra wild card idea goes, it's also becoming a polarizing issue amongst fans: does a sudden-death, one-game, single-elimination playoff matchup detract from the spirit and integrity of the playoffs? By allowing an extra team to just hop on the October-bound train only to have a higher chance at getting thrown under the tracks, it takes away a little of the magic, knowing that a team that worked so hard to get into the playoffs can either easily get knocked out, or even worse, knock out another team with high aspirations. But that's just how the game is: everyone can't win all the time. Except for the Yankees.
While we're at all this relocation and switching, why don't we just get rid of the Boston Red Sox? I would be more than fine with that.
While many players, managers and fans may not agree with this, giving both leagues the same number of teams might bring a parity to the game that hasn't really existed since the expansion teams of the 90s and the creation of the Central division. The question is, what team makes the switch? And does it geographically make sense for a team to do so? If we here at TBF had to guess, we would say that a team from the NL Central (only division in the game with 6 teams) would make the jump to the AL West (only division in the game with 4 teams). There have been rumors that the Houston Astros could make the switch, thereby instituting a slightly more interesting rivalry with the Texas Rangers. However, being in the same division or league might make the matchup a little less interesting (who cares about watching a Phillies-Pirates matchup? Exactly). Then there's the idea of maybe moving one of the NL teams to make more geographical sense for switching to the AL. Take the Astros and move them to Nevada? The Las Vegas Gamblers? Hey, stranger things have happened (the Montreal Expos?). Hell, the city of Milwaukee has had both of these things happen to it: the Braves left for Atlanta in the 60s, and then the Brewers, who started out as an AL team, made the switch to the NL in 1998. Or, they could always move a team from the AL Central to the AL West, then switch an NL Central team over to the AL Central. But, again, which team makes the switch? The team closest to being in the West would be the Royals, and they're in the heartland of the Central geographically. Or, even more ridiculously, they could simply create 2 more teams in the AL, one in the West and one in the Central to match the NL counterparts. The Oklahoma Plains? The Utah Salts? All right, if it happened, the teams would have better names, but we're just speculating here.
Now, it wouldn't necessarily be prudent or even sensible to make this kind of move. Baseball fans and everyone involved in the sport haven't seemed to mind the imbalance in the number of teams, and the playoff structure has been such that an equal number of teams make it to the postseason despite there being 2 extra teams in the NL. However, if the plans to add a second wild card in both leagues gets accepted (which all indications are pointing to it coming to pass after this or next season), it would only make sense to have 15 teams in both leagues. 5 teams in each division, 1 winner in each division then 2 open spots for any 2 teams that didn't win their respective divisions, 1 game playoff between the two wild cards, and on from there. Not only does it spice up the postseason, it gives a better sense of balance and fairness: in the NL, 2 more teams lose out on a chance at the playoffs every year than in the AL, whereas if they had the same number of teams, there would be a slightly fairer chance for every team (aside from the Cubs, let's face it). As far as this extra wild card idea goes, it's also becoming a polarizing issue amongst fans: does a sudden-death, one-game, single-elimination playoff matchup detract from the spirit and integrity of the playoffs? By allowing an extra team to just hop on the October-bound train only to have a higher chance at getting thrown under the tracks, it takes away a little of the magic, knowing that a team that worked so hard to get into the playoffs can either easily get knocked out, or even worse, knock out another team with high aspirations. But that's just how the game is: everyone can't win all the time. Except for the Yankees.
While we're at all this relocation and switching, why don't we just get rid of the Boston Red Sox? I would be more than fine with that.
Friday, June 3, 2011
Cherokee, Choctaw, Chickasaw...Sizemore?
Close your eyes for a second. I'm going to list a few stats, and you try to guess what team I'm talking about.
5th overall in batting average (.259)
16th in ERA (3.80)
Team leader in home runs has 10
No one else has more than 6
Team leader in wins has 6
1 other pitcher has 5 wins
33 wins
1st place
Open your eyes.
Give up?
It's the Cleveland Indians.
I won't blame you if you close your eyes again, and I certainly won't think less of you if you decide to keep them closed until November.
Somehow, with team stats that don't place them any higher than 8th overall in any category, the Cleveland Indians have had a stranglehold on the AL Central divison since Opening Day, and it doesn't seem as if they'll be letting go any time soon.
On the flip side, the Minnesota Twins, winner of the AL Central 6 times in the last decade, are 20 games under .500, trail the Indians by 16.5 games, and don't rank higher than 26th overall in any category, offensive or defensive.
Uhh...what?
Did someone flip the standings? Is this an elaborate prank played by Native American spirits, to make us think we're back in the '90s, or even the '40s? The Indians haven't had a winning record since 2007 (the last time CC Sabathia and Cliff Lee played in the same uniform and made a postseason run before falling to the Red Sox in the ALCS), and won only 69 games last year. Now, they're almost halfway to that number...and we're only a third of the way through the season.
Should we blame powerful young catcher Carlos Santana for revitalizing the offense? Should we shake our fists at Shin-Soo Choo for exempting his mandatory military service for his native South Korea? Should we get mad at Josh Tomlin for leading the team, and most of the AL, with 7 wins and a 3.07 ERA? Hell, should we blame anyone at all? Is this a situation that deserves blame? Well, maybe. But the blame doesn't rest on the headrests of these real tomahawk choppers (no offense, Atlanta). They've simply been doing what every ballclub should be doing: they've been winning games. You want to blame someone for the Indians' successes? Blame Ron Gardenhire. Blame Ozzie Guillen. Blame Jim Leyland and Ned Yost, but keep Manny Acta's name out of the tirading and shouting. When you want to start giving them praise, that's when Acta's named should be brought up. Regardless of injuries, rainouts, unlucky calls and at times faltering offense and defense, Acta's team has pulled through to have one of the best records in the game. All the other managers have dealt with just as many of these negative consequences, and have yet to turn things around. You can't get mad at the Indians. They're doing what they haven't done enough of since the mid 90's, and that's lighting up the basepaths, shutting opponents down from the mound, and refusing to allow anyone to overtake them for very long. Will this hold up? Only time will tell. But, considering that the favored Twins are so far back entering June, it seems likely that this October, we'll all have to take a puff of that peace pipe these boys are passing around...they sure seem to have enough to share.
5th overall in batting average (.259)
16th in ERA (3.80)
Team leader in home runs has 10
No one else has more than 6
Team leader in wins has 6
1 other pitcher has 5 wins
33 wins
1st place
Open your eyes.
Give up?
It's the Cleveland Indians.
I won't blame you if you close your eyes again, and I certainly won't think less of you if you decide to keep them closed until November.
Somehow, with team stats that don't place them any higher than 8th overall in any category, the Cleveland Indians have had a stranglehold on the AL Central divison since Opening Day, and it doesn't seem as if they'll be letting go any time soon.
On the flip side, the Minnesota Twins, winner of the AL Central 6 times in the last decade, are 20 games under .500, trail the Indians by 16.5 games, and don't rank higher than 26th overall in any category, offensive or defensive.
Uhh...what?
Did someone flip the standings? Is this an elaborate prank played by Native American spirits, to make us think we're back in the '90s, or even the '40s? The Indians haven't had a winning record since 2007 (the last time CC Sabathia and Cliff Lee played in the same uniform and made a postseason run before falling to the Red Sox in the ALCS), and won only 69 games last year. Now, they're almost halfway to that number...and we're only a third of the way through the season.
Should we blame powerful young catcher Carlos Santana for revitalizing the offense? Should we shake our fists at Shin-Soo Choo for exempting his mandatory military service for his native South Korea? Should we get mad at Josh Tomlin for leading the team, and most of the AL, with 7 wins and a 3.07 ERA? Hell, should we blame anyone at all? Is this a situation that deserves blame? Well, maybe. But the blame doesn't rest on the headrests of these real tomahawk choppers (no offense, Atlanta). They've simply been doing what every ballclub should be doing: they've been winning games. You want to blame someone for the Indians' successes? Blame Ron Gardenhire. Blame Ozzie Guillen. Blame Jim Leyland and Ned Yost, but keep Manny Acta's name out of the tirading and shouting. When you want to start giving them praise, that's when Acta's named should be brought up. Regardless of injuries, rainouts, unlucky calls and at times faltering offense and defense, Acta's team has pulled through to have one of the best records in the game. All the other managers have dealt with just as many of these negative consequences, and have yet to turn things around. You can't get mad at the Indians. They're doing what they haven't done enough of since the mid 90's, and that's lighting up the basepaths, shutting opponents down from the mound, and refusing to allow anyone to overtake them for very long. Will this hold up? Only time will tell. But, considering that the favored Twins are so far back entering June, it seems likely that this October, we'll all have to take a puff of that peace pipe these boys are passing around...they sure seem to have enough to share.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)