Quick Thought: Why is there only one play-in game for the NCAA Tournament? Wouldn't it make sense to have four of these games so three more deserving at-large teams can secure a spot in the Big Dance?
Thursday's Upset Special: Western Kentucky. Illinois G Chester Frazier will likely miss the game and Western Kentucky has more experience than the Illini.
Word to the Wise: Oklahoma might be the weakest #2 seed, but they will be playing their first two games close to home, and the Sooners went undefeated at home with Blake Griffin in the lineup.
My Final Four: Louisville, Missouri, Pittsburgh, North Carolina
My Championship Prediction: North Carolina over Louisville. Not sexy, but I don't see (m)any stumbling blocks for either team before the Final Four.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Mock Draft III - Top 10
For a little change of pace, I will compare my newest mock drafts to those of Mel Kiper and Todd McShay of ESPN as well as Michael Lombardi from The National Football Post. Commentary certainly appreciated.
1. Detroit
Kiper: Matthew Stafford
McShay: Stafford
Lombardi: Stafford
Banter: Matthew Stafford, Georgia, QB - Stafford established himself as the class of the position at the Combine. If the Lions choose to address this need with the first overall pick - and unless they trade for Jay Cutler, I think they will - Stafford will be their guy. With all the hoopla surrounding the NCAA Tournament, Stafford's Pro Day might go unnoticed to many. I'm pretty sure the Lions won't miss it.
2. St. Louis
Kiper: Jason Smith
McShay: J. Smith
Lombardi: Eugene Monroe
Banter: Jason Smith, Baylor, OT - Smith seems like the class of the deep OT class.
3. Kansas City
Kiper: Aaron Curry
McShay: Curry
Lombardi: Curry
Banter: Eugene Monroe, Virginia, OT - I love the storyline of Monroe and last year's first rounder from Virginia, Branden Albert, protecting Matt Cassel.
4. Seattle
Kiper: Monroe
McShay: B.J. Raji
Lombardi: Raji
Banter: Aaron Curry, Wake Forest, LB - Curry dominated the Combine and is now considered by many to be the draft's top prospect. After Seattle's signing of WR T.J. Housyourdaddy and Michael Crabtree's imminent surgery, the two no longer look like the perfect match they were a few weeks back. The trade of LB Julian Peterson clears the way for Curry.
5. Cleveland
Kiper: Raji
McShay: Brian Orakpo
Lombardi: Orakpo
Banter: B.J. Raji, Boston College, DT - A great run-stuffer, but I still question why he never dominated in college like his skills indicate he would. Again, I do not think Raji is worthy of being a top five pick, but this is a mock draft and not what I would do.
6. Cincinnati
Kiper: Michael Crabtree
McShay: Monroe
Lombardi: J. Smith
Banter: Michael Crabtree, Texas Tech, WR - The Bengals replace Housyourdaddy with Crabtree. Not a bad deal for them although they have a lot more needs than just this.
7. Oakland
Kiper: Jeremy Maclin
McShay: Maclin
Lombardi: Andre Smith
Banter: Jeremy Maclin, Missouri, WR - Al Davis has always been enamored with speed, and Maclin has plenty of it.
8. Jacksonville
Kiper: Matt Sanchez
McShay: Crabtree
Lombardi: Sanchez
Banter: Andre Smith, Alabama, OT - I realize Smith has not had a great few weeks, but his talent is undeniable, and he can slide into the right tackle position.
9. Green Bay
Kiper: Orakpo
McShay: Aaron Maybin
Lombardi: Maybin
Banter: Brian Orakpo, Texas, DE - If he can prove he's healthy at UT's Pro Day, Orakpo would help revamp a struggling defense at Lambeau.
10. San Francisco
Kiper: Maybin
McShay: A. Smith
Lombardi: Robert Ayers
Banter: Mark Sanchez, USC, QB - Can Sanchez be the QB of the future that Alex Smith never was? The 49ers sure hope so.
1. Detroit
Kiper: Matthew Stafford
McShay: Stafford
Lombardi: Stafford
Banter: Matthew Stafford, Georgia, QB - Stafford established himself as the class of the position at the Combine. If the Lions choose to address this need with the first overall pick - and unless they trade for Jay Cutler, I think they will - Stafford will be their guy. With all the hoopla surrounding the NCAA Tournament, Stafford's Pro Day might go unnoticed to many. I'm pretty sure the Lions won't miss it.
2. St. Louis
Kiper: Jason Smith
McShay: J. Smith
Lombardi: Eugene Monroe
Banter: Jason Smith, Baylor, OT - Smith seems like the class of the deep OT class.
3. Kansas City
Kiper: Aaron Curry
McShay: Curry
Lombardi: Curry
Banter: Eugene Monroe, Virginia, OT - I love the storyline of Monroe and last year's first rounder from Virginia, Branden Albert, protecting Matt Cassel.
4. Seattle
Kiper: Monroe
McShay: B.J. Raji
Lombardi: Raji
Banter: Aaron Curry, Wake Forest, LB - Curry dominated the Combine and is now considered by many to be the draft's top prospect. After Seattle's signing of WR T.J. Housyourdaddy and Michael Crabtree's imminent surgery, the two no longer look like the perfect match they were a few weeks back. The trade of LB Julian Peterson clears the way for Curry.
5. Cleveland
Kiper: Raji
McShay: Brian Orakpo
Lombardi: Orakpo
Banter: B.J. Raji, Boston College, DT - A great run-stuffer, but I still question why he never dominated in college like his skills indicate he would. Again, I do not think Raji is worthy of being a top five pick, but this is a mock draft and not what I would do.
6. Cincinnati
Kiper: Michael Crabtree
McShay: Monroe
Lombardi: J. Smith
Banter: Michael Crabtree, Texas Tech, WR - The Bengals replace Housyourdaddy with Crabtree. Not a bad deal for them although they have a lot more needs than just this.
7. Oakland
Kiper: Jeremy Maclin
McShay: Maclin
Lombardi: Andre Smith
Banter: Jeremy Maclin, Missouri, WR - Al Davis has always been enamored with speed, and Maclin has plenty of it.
8. Jacksonville
Kiper: Matt Sanchez
McShay: Crabtree
Lombardi: Sanchez
Banter: Andre Smith, Alabama, OT - I realize Smith has not had a great few weeks, but his talent is undeniable, and he can slide into the right tackle position.
9. Green Bay
Kiper: Orakpo
McShay: Aaron Maybin
Lombardi: Maybin
Banter: Brian Orakpo, Texas, DE - If he can prove he's healthy at UT's Pro Day, Orakpo would help revamp a struggling defense at Lambeau.
10. San Francisco
Kiper: Maybin
McShay: A. Smith
Lombardi: Robert Ayers
Banter: Mark Sanchez, USC, QB - Can Sanchez be the QB of the future that Alex Smith never was? The 49ers sure hope so.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Recap of Sports Pet Peeves
Over the years, I have slowly revealed my Top 50 Sports Pet Peeves. The following have been published.
Sports Pet Peeve #1: In-game interviews of head coaches. I can tolerate coaches being interviewed at halftime (to a certain degree), but what is the purpose of interviewing a coach during the course of a game? Let me make sure I have this straight. It would be a good idea for a coach to divulge strategy or provide analysis during a game so the opposing team can know what he is thinking? How does that make sense? It's infuriating and completely nonsensical. These coaches get berated by the media for hours before and hours after the game. Leave them alone during the game. I beg you.
Note: This applies specifically to hockey (NBC) and baseball (Fox / ESPN). Sports Pet Peeve
#2: Detailing the score of a game by using the losing team's score first. An example: "The Dodgers lost to the Mets three to seven." No, the Dodgers lost to the Mets seven to three. It's not a difficult concept. Higher score followed by lower score.
Note: This does not apply to sports with sets (tennis, volleyball, etc) as it would be impossible to determine which team / player won which sets by using the rules outlined above. So, saying Serena Williams beat Venus Williams 6-2, 3-6, 7-5 would be necessary and perfectly acceptable.
#3: Unwarranted excessive celebration penalties after touchdowns. I understand offenses such as the "slitting the throat" gesture and taunting opponents, but the NFL and NCAA need to relax the illegalities of certain celebrations. A touchdown typically results from perfect execution after hours of film study and practice. Why do these governing bodies find the need to prohibit choreographed celebrations with teammates? God forbid a player share in the happiness with others who helped him arrive in the end zone.
#6: When trying to down a punt deep inside an opponent's territory, a player will wildly slide / jump / dive on top of a football forcing it into the end zone for a touchback. Failure to down the ball inside the 1-yard line has become an epidemic. I cannot count the times this has occurred recently.
#11: Defensive three seconds in the NBA. It's the NBA, supposedly the cream of the crop of professional basketball leagues worldwide.
Why can't you play any defense you want?
#34: Soccer players wearing gloves. Really, soccer players? It's so cold that you need gloves to cover your delicate fingers? Man up. You don't use your hands anyway.
Note: This applies to cross-country runners as well, but no one pays them much bother anyway.
#38: The Big 10 calling itself the Big 10. Has anyone figured out why the Big 10 hasn't changed its name to the Big 11? There are 11 teams in the conference; the conference logo (see below) has the shadow of an "11." You promote yourselves as institutions of higher learning. Do the intelligent thing here.
Sports Pet Peeve #1: In-game interviews of head coaches. I can tolerate coaches being interviewed at halftime (to a certain degree), but what is the purpose of interviewing a coach during the course of a game? Let me make sure I have this straight. It would be a good idea for a coach to divulge strategy or provide analysis during a game so the opposing team can know what he is thinking? How does that make sense? It's infuriating and completely nonsensical. These coaches get berated by the media for hours before and hours after the game. Leave them alone during the game. I beg you.
Note: This applies specifically to hockey (NBC) and baseball (Fox / ESPN). Sports Pet Peeve
#2: Detailing the score of a game by using the losing team's score first. An example: "The Dodgers lost to the Mets three to seven." No, the Dodgers lost to the Mets seven to three. It's not a difficult concept. Higher score followed by lower score.
Note: This does not apply to sports with sets (tennis, volleyball, etc) as it would be impossible to determine which team / player won which sets by using the rules outlined above. So, saying Serena Williams beat Venus Williams 6-2, 3-6, 7-5 would be necessary and perfectly acceptable.
#3: Unwarranted excessive celebration penalties after touchdowns. I understand offenses such as the "slitting the throat" gesture and taunting opponents, but the NFL and NCAA need to relax the illegalities of certain celebrations. A touchdown typically results from perfect execution after hours of film study and practice. Why do these governing bodies find the need to prohibit choreographed celebrations with teammates? God forbid a player share in the happiness with others who helped him arrive in the end zone.
#6: When trying to down a punt deep inside an opponent's territory, a player will wildly slide / jump / dive on top of a football forcing it into the end zone for a touchback. Failure to down the ball inside the 1-yard line has become an epidemic. I cannot count the times this has occurred recently.
#11: Defensive three seconds in the NBA. It's the NBA, supposedly the cream of the crop of professional basketball leagues worldwide.
Why can't you play any defense you want?
#34: Soccer players wearing gloves. Really, soccer players? It's so cold that you need gloves to cover your delicate fingers? Man up. You don't use your hands anyway.
Note: This applies to cross-country runners as well, but no one pays them much bother anyway.
#38: The Big 10 calling itself the Big 10. Has anyone figured out why the Big 10 hasn't changed its name to the Big 11? There are 11 teams in the conference; the conference logo (see below) has the shadow of an "11." You promote yourselves as institutions of higher learning. Do the intelligent thing here.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Heyman and I Don't See Eye-to-Eye
It has become pretty evident that Jon Heyman and I agree on very few issues. In a recent article, he graded each team's winter moves. I have a few bones to pick.
Heyman's Top 10 "Winners"
Phillies (1): As Heyman alludes to, the Phillies signed Cole Hamels and Ryan Howard to long-term deals. However, barring a trade, these two had no way out of Philadelphia as the team controlled their arbitration years anyway. They weren't going anywhere. The Phils other "big move" - signing 36-year old Raul Ibanez to a three-year, $30 million deal - now looks laughable. This team did not improve that much to warrant the #1 ranking. Ruben Amaro gets a B from me in his first winter as GM.
Mets (2): Sure, the Mets added K-Rod and JJ Putz to help mend a shredded bullpen, but they failed to add any difference-making starters. No, Tim Redding and Freddy Garcia do not qualify. I won't even get started on the ageless Livan Hernandez signing. They also did not address the hole at second base. Luis Castillo will not cut it. Omar Minaya gets a B- from me.
Yankees (3): Any of these lists that does not have the Yankees at the top should be discarded immediately. CC Sabathia, AJ Burnett, and Mark Teixeira in one winter? Unreal. Brian Cashman gets an A+ here.
A's (4): I've detailed Oakland's moves ad nauseam in past posts, but I love the Holliday deal. Billy Beane gets an A.
Diamondbacks (5): Arizona lost Adam Dunn, Orlando Hudson, and Brandon Lyon and will probably watch Juan Cruz depart via free agency. They must have signed someone or many someones to compensate, right? Heyman ranks the D'backs this high because, "Jon Garland gives them a solid No. 3 starter." Is this some sort of joke? How does that equation yield a positive result? Aside from the fact that Garland has a career WHIP around 1.4 and averages about 4.5 K's/9, the team failed to add anyone else of note. Josh Byrnes gets a D from me.
Rays (6): No arguments here as they added Pat Burrell at a reasonable price and did not lose anyone of note. Andrew Friedman gets a B-.
Giants (7): Stop me when you hear the name of an impact player: Juan Uribe, Rich Aurilia, Edgar Renteria (I said impact not intact), Bobby Howry, Jeremy Affeldt, Randy Johnson. I heard crickets until RJ's name and he'll be 45 years old on Opening Day. Brian Sabean gets a C-, and that's only because he didn't trade Tim Lincecum.
Braves (8): They overspent for Derek Lowe but traded no Major League-ready prospects for Javier Vazquez. Frank Wren gets a B.
Red Sox (9): Again, no arguments as they signed Dustin Pedroia and Kevin Youkilis to long-term deals and bought a number of low-risk, high-reward free agents. Theo Epstein gets a B-.
White Sox (10): They lost Vazquez, Nick Swisher and Orlando Cabrera and added no one of note. Kenny Williams gets a C.
Banter's Top 10 "Winners"
1. Yankees
2. A's
3. Braves
4. Cubs: Added Milton Bradley and Kevin Gregg.
5. Indians: Added Kerry Wood, Mark DeRosa and took a flier on Carl Pavano.
6. Orioles: Locked up Nick Markakis and Brian Roberts to long-term deals. Dished out no palm-to-the-forehead deals which means a lot in Baltimore.
7. Mariners: Improved the defense and lost Type A free agent Ibanez meaning they get a first round pick as compensation.
8. Phillies
9. Rockies: They can't afford Holliday so getting Huston Street, Greg Smith and Carlos Gonzalez is a decent return.
10. Mets
Heyman's Top 10 "Winners"
Phillies (1): As Heyman alludes to, the Phillies signed Cole Hamels and Ryan Howard to long-term deals. However, barring a trade, these two had no way out of Philadelphia as the team controlled their arbitration years anyway. They weren't going anywhere. The Phils other "big move" - signing 36-year old Raul Ibanez to a three-year, $30 million deal - now looks laughable. This team did not improve that much to warrant the #1 ranking. Ruben Amaro gets a B from me in his first winter as GM.
Mets (2): Sure, the Mets added K-Rod and JJ Putz to help mend a shredded bullpen, but they failed to add any difference-making starters. No, Tim Redding and Freddy Garcia do not qualify. I won't even get started on the ageless Livan Hernandez signing. They also did not address the hole at second base. Luis Castillo will not cut it. Omar Minaya gets a B- from me.
Yankees (3): Any of these lists that does not have the Yankees at the top should be discarded immediately. CC Sabathia, AJ Burnett, and Mark Teixeira in one winter? Unreal. Brian Cashman gets an A+ here.
A's (4): I've detailed Oakland's moves ad nauseam in past posts, but I love the Holliday deal. Billy Beane gets an A.
Diamondbacks (5): Arizona lost Adam Dunn, Orlando Hudson, and Brandon Lyon and will probably watch Juan Cruz depart via free agency. They must have signed someone or many someones to compensate, right? Heyman ranks the D'backs this high because, "Jon Garland gives them a solid No. 3 starter." Is this some sort of joke? How does that equation yield a positive result? Aside from the fact that Garland has a career WHIP around 1.4 and averages about 4.5 K's/9, the team failed to add anyone else of note. Josh Byrnes gets a D from me.
Rays (6): No arguments here as they added Pat Burrell at a reasonable price and did not lose anyone of note. Andrew Friedman gets a B-.
Giants (7): Stop me when you hear the name of an impact player: Juan Uribe, Rich Aurilia, Edgar Renteria (I said impact not intact), Bobby Howry, Jeremy Affeldt, Randy Johnson. I heard crickets until RJ's name and he'll be 45 years old on Opening Day. Brian Sabean gets a C-, and that's only because he didn't trade Tim Lincecum.
Braves (8): They overspent for Derek Lowe but traded no Major League-ready prospects for Javier Vazquez. Frank Wren gets a B.
Red Sox (9): Again, no arguments as they signed Dustin Pedroia and Kevin Youkilis to long-term deals and bought a number of low-risk, high-reward free agents. Theo Epstein gets a B-.
White Sox (10): They lost Vazquez, Nick Swisher and Orlando Cabrera and added no one of note. Kenny Williams gets a C.
Banter's Top 10 "Winners"
1. Yankees
2. A's
3. Braves
4. Cubs: Added Milton Bradley and Kevin Gregg.
5. Indians: Added Kerry Wood, Mark DeRosa and took a flier on Carl Pavano.
6. Orioles: Locked up Nick Markakis and Brian Roberts to long-term deals. Dished out no palm-to-the-forehead deals which means a lot in Baltimore.
7. Mariners: Improved the defense and lost Type A free agent Ibanez meaning they get a first round pick as compensation.
8. Phillies
9. Rockies: They can't afford Holliday so getting Huston Street, Greg Smith and Carlos Gonzalez is a decent return.
10. Mets
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
The Cubs' Lineup
Banter-favorite, Buster Olney recently posed a question to his readers: How would you construct the Cubs' lineup?
Olney's Lineup
2B Mike Fontenot, L
1B Derrek Lee, R
RF Milton Bradley, S
3B Aramis Ramirez, R
CF Kosuke Fukudome, L
LF Alfonso Soriano, R
C Geovany Soto, RS
S Ryan Theriot, R
Banter's Lineup (vs. RHP / LHP)
The signing of Milton Bradley gives Lou Piniella the flexibility to do a number of different things. However, he would be best suited using these two lineups.
2B Fontenot / SS Theriot
3B Ramirez / LF Soriano
1B Lee
RF Bradley
LF Soriano / 3B Ramirez
C Soto
CF Fukudome
SS Theriot / 2B Fontenot
Rationale
*If after all the money the Cubs have spent and all the deals they have made this offseason Kosuke Fukodome finds himself in a major RBI spot in the batting order, they will have accomplished nothing.
After July 31 (excluding playoffs), Fukodome's stats looked like this:
AB: 128
HR: 2
RBI: 18
R: 12
SB: 2
His post-All Star Break splits were .217/.314/.326 also known as Willie Bloomquist territory.
As bad as that was, his postseason was worse. He mustered only a single in ten at bats while whiffing four times.
Ramirez's splits against LHP / RHP last season: .239; .333; .388 / 305; .394; .560.
Olney's Lineup
2B Mike Fontenot, L
1B Derrek Lee, R
RF Milton Bradley, S
3B Aramis Ramirez, R
CF Kosuke Fukudome, L
LF Alfonso Soriano, R
C Geovany Soto, RS
S Ryan Theriot, R
Banter's Lineup (vs. RHP / LHP)
The signing of Milton Bradley gives Lou Piniella the flexibility to do a number of different things. However, he would be best suited using these two lineups.
2B Fontenot / SS Theriot
3B Ramirez / LF Soriano
1B Lee
RF Bradley
LF Soriano / 3B Ramirez
C Soto
CF Fukudome
SS Theriot / 2B Fontenot
Rationale
*If after all the money the Cubs have spent and all the deals they have made this offseason Kosuke Fukodome finds himself in a major RBI spot in the batting order, they will have accomplished nothing.
After July 31 (excluding playoffs), Fukodome's stats looked like this:
AB: 128
HR: 2
RBI: 18
R: 12
SB: 2
His post-All Star Break splits were .217/.314/.326 also known as Willie Bloomquist territory.
As bad as that was, his postseason was worse. He mustered only a single in ten at bats while whiffing four times.
*Sure, the lefty-righty alternation can be an advantage, but the Cubs right handed batters handle right handed pitching relatively well aside from Soriano.
Soto hit 18 of 23 home runs off righties.
*Why alternate Soriano and Ramirez in the 2 / 5 holes against? Check out the numbers:
Soriano's splits against LHP / RHP last season: 351; .404; .710 / .252; .319; .460.
Ramirez's splits against LHP / RHP last season: .239; .333; .388 / 305; .394; .560.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
In the Eyes of the Mets: Lowe vs. Perez
Background
Coming into the offseason, the New York Mets had a gaping hole in the bullpen and the middle of their rotation. GM Omar Minaya addressed the bullpen early by signing Fransisco Rodriguez away from the LA Angels and acquiring J.J. Putz from the Seattle Mariners. Incidentally, Minaya may have also improved his bullpen by trading away Aaron Heilman in the Putz deal, but we will save that topic for another day.
Rodriguez, as even casual fans know, set the Major League record for saves in a season (62) last year. Unfortunately for the Mets, Rodriguez was labeled as a Type A free agent meaning the team that signed him - in this case the Mets - would have to surrender its first round pick (assuming the signing team's first round pick fell outside the top 15 picks). In addition, the team "losing" the Type A free agent receives a supplemental first round pick. Because of this, the Mets' first pick will be (approximately) number 66 overall.
Lowe vs. Perez
After strengthening the 'pen, the Mets honed in on Type A free agent Derek Lowe of the LA Dodgers and their own Type A free agent, Oliver Perez. Who should the Mets have signed?
Assuming that the Mets could only afford either Lowe or Perez, it would seem to me that Lowe should have been the choice.
As mentioned above, by signing K-Rod, the Mets were forced to surrender their first round selection. So, if they would have signed another Type A free agent, they would have "only" sacrificed their second round choice. Let's assume this Type A free was Derek Lowe. The Dodgers would receive pick 66 and a supplemental first rounder from the league. Using logic from above, the Mets would not have been able to re-sign Perez.
The team signing Perez would then owe the Mets its first round pick (or second round pick if it picked outside the top 15). For argument's sake, let's assume the Atlanta Braves who actually signed Lowe decided to sign Perez with all their excess cash. The Mets would receive the Braves' second round pick (approximately number 50 overall) and a supplemental first round (approximately number 41).
Let's play a quick game of multiple choice. Which package would you rather have:
A) Oliver Perez and pick 66; or
B) Derek Lowe, pick 41 and pick 50 (with the possibility that this pick could end up being a late first rounder if a team picking outside the top 15 - possibly the Diamondbacks or Dodgers - signed Perez).
The Mets' farm system can be described as mediocre at best. (Keith Law ranked their system 17th best in the Majors, but that seems awfully kind.) Letting Perez sign elsewhere would have been an intelligent way to recoup some draft picks. Now, Omar Minaya's hand is somewhat forced. He will probably have to re-sign Perez, because without him, the rotation would be in shambles.
When trying to replenish a farm system that has been somewhat depleted by trades, it would have made more sense to pursue Lowe more aggresively rather than re-signing Perez.
Coming into the offseason, the New York Mets had a gaping hole in the bullpen and the middle of their rotation. GM Omar Minaya addressed the bullpen early by signing Fransisco Rodriguez away from the LA Angels and acquiring J.J. Putz from the Seattle Mariners. Incidentally, Minaya may have also improved his bullpen by trading away Aaron Heilman in the Putz deal, but we will save that topic for another day.
Rodriguez, as even casual fans know, set the Major League record for saves in a season (62) last year. Unfortunately for the Mets, Rodriguez was labeled as a Type A free agent meaning the team that signed him - in this case the Mets - would have to surrender its first round pick (assuming the signing team's first round pick fell outside the top 15 picks). In addition, the team "losing" the Type A free agent receives a supplemental first round pick. Because of this, the Mets' first pick will be (approximately) number 66 overall.
Lowe vs. Perez
After strengthening the 'pen, the Mets honed in on Type A free agent Derek Lowe of the LA Dodgers and their own Type A free agent, Oliver Perez. Who should the Mets have signed?
Assuming that the Mets could only afford either Lowe or Perez, it would seem to me that Lowe should have been the choice.
As mentioned above, by signing K-Rod, the Mets were forced to surrender their first round selection. So, if they would have signed another Type A free agent, they would have "only" sacrificed their second round choice. Let's assume this Type A free was Derek Lowe. The Dodgers would receive pick 66 and a supplemental first rounder from the league. Using logic from above, the Mets would not have been able to re-sign Perez.
The team signing Perez would then owe the Mets its first round pick (or second round pick if it picked outside the top 15). For argument's sake, let's assume the Atlanta Braves who actually signed Lowe decided to sign Perez with all their excess cash. The Mets would receive the Braves' second round pick (approximately number 50 overall) and a supplemental first round (approximately number 41).
Let's play a quick game of multiple choice. Which package would you rather have:
A) Oliver Perez and pick 66; or
B) Derek Lowe, pick 41 and pick 50 (with the possibility that this pick could end up being a late first rounder if a team picking outside the top 15 - possibly the Diamondbacks or Dodgers - signed Perez).
The Mets' farm system can be described as mediocre at best. (Keith Law ranked their system 17th best in the Majors, but that seems awfully kind.) Letting Perez sign elsewhere would have been an intelligent way to recoup some draft picks. Now, Omar Minaya's hand is somewhat forced. He will probably have to re-sign Perez, because without him, the rotation would be in shambles.
When trying to replenish a farm system that has been somewhat depleted by trades, it would have made more sense to pursue Lowe more aggresively rather than re-signing Perez.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Notes from the World's Most Famous Arena
I went to an Islander-Ranger game with my father a few weeks back at Madison Square Garden and was struck by four things:
- Ranger fans still chant "Potvin sucks" in reference to Denis Potvin, the hated Islander defenseman who retired 21(!) years ago. I think it's about time to rally around something else.
- There's no chance the Islanders lose the race for worst record in the NHL.
- The City of Philadelphia's Tourism Agency has put an enormous advertisement on the west side of the Garden (example 4,581 the US is in a Recession). How desperate can the Garden be for revenue that they allow the home of two despised rivals - 76ers and Flyers - to advertise on the outside of it?
- During each intermission, two kids were selected to ride on the zamboni. As cool as that must have been for those kids, it was equally uncool, and borderline pathetic, that they they were forced to wear helmets. Were these kids a threat to jump off the zamboni without notice? Have there been zamboni catastrophes before that I don't know about? Are kids in danger of having objects heaved at them? Are these kids' parents petrified their babies will be tossed off the zamboni during a hairpin turn? So then, why do these kids need helmets? This is another reason we, as a country, can be perceived as being weak. There is zero chance kids in Russia or any other badass country would make kids riding on zambonies wear helmets. And, what's next? Kids on playgrounds wearing helmets? Kids on Ferris Wheels? Where does it end? So many questions, no good answers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)