Saturday, December 02, 2006
What a messed up day
UCLA-U$C, Kings-Ducks, and Illinois-Arizona all on at the same time. Brutal. Worse yet, all three teams I'll be rooting for figure to lose. Ugh.
Friday, December 01, 2006
So, Tomorrow's the Big Game
Well, not THAT Big Game, but a big game nonetheless. UCLA will be getting a great deal of support from somewhat unusual locations like Ann Arbor and Gainesville, while U$C will be getting its typical support from the legions of front-runners that scoop up all that gear when the women of troy are good in football. What does that all mean? Nothing.
But anyway, as predictions go, there's no logical case that can be made for UCLA pulling off the upset in this one. The only way they win is if the score stays low, which isn't altogether impossible, just highly improbable. The big problems, as I see them:
In the end, I'll say the final will be U$C 27; UCLA 13. It's going to be 17-13 with about ten minutes to go, at which point U$C will kick a field goal, get a stop, and score a touchdown to cap the scoring. Right now I'd take U$C and give the points. I hope to hell that doesn't happen, but that's what I feel in my gut.
But anyway, as predictions go, there's no logical case that can be made for UCLA pulling off the upset in this one. The only way they win is if the score stays low, which isn't altogether impossible, just highly improbable. The big problems, as I see them:
- UCLA has one good cornerback, while U$C has two really good receivers, along with a good running game. One and a half if you count Al Verner. But when Rodney Van is in the game, he's going to get torched. He hasn't stopped a good receiver all season, and these are the best receivers he's going to face. They can't match Trey Brown up on one without getting burned by the other, and
- If the Bruins get behind early, the don't have the offense to come back. They'll certainly hold up their end of the bargain on the low scoring, but I just can't see them scoring enough points to win.
In the end, I'll say the final will be U$C 27; UCLA 13. It's going to be 17-13 with about ten minutes to go, at which point U$C will kick a field goal, get a stop, and score a touchdown to cap the scoring. Right now I'd take U$C and give the points. I hope to hell that doesn't happen, but that's what I feel in my gut.
Thursday, November 30, 2006
Updates on the stuff I care about
UCLA
The basketball team will be #1 in both polls next week following Ohio State's loss to North Carolina last night in what was actually a pretty exciting game. Both teams look pretty damn good, and I wouldn't be shocked if they met in Atlanta in April, unless of course the final four isn't in Atlanta, but I'm not going to look it up, so you can figure out what I mean. Anyway, as noted before, this just means it will be that much more shocking when the UCR Highlanders shock the world on Sunday.
On the gridiron, the coaching staff announced today that Pat Cowan would remain the starter going into the game with the women of troy this weekend. I'm not happy about this. Nothing against Pat Cowan, but I see the team with two identities. They're either a) the pretty mediocre team with Cowan at the helm, or b) the mediocre team with Ben Olson behind center who may actually be really good at times. In other words, Cowan is more of a known quantity, and while Olson coming off an injury may be worse than Cowan, he may be better, and the known quantity that is Cowan will not be enough to beat $C. It's a gamble, but one worth taking. Though quite frankly, the play calling figures to be so conservative with either one that I can't see the Bruins scoring more than 21 points at best. That's probably not going to be enough.
Angels
The rumored supposedly done deal that shall remain nameless looks less and less like a done deal. The HH crew have been commenting on reports that a) Kenny Williams says he hasn't approached anyone about Crede, and b) Scioscia told Figgins he's the third baseman next year. Well, as a wise man once said, well, let's not start sucking each other's dicks quite yet. First, Williams never said that no one else approached him. Yeah, I'm parsing, but that's the way these guys work. Second, who cares what Scioscia told Figgins? Nothing is settled until those guys take the field next year. Of course, either Stoneman or Williams could make some sort of unequivocal statement that no deal will be done involving those players, but they won't because they're GMs, and GMs hedge. It's part of the job.
A reader pointed me to another take over here earlier today. I agree with this part:
There is really no one the White Sox would consider trading who could a) help the Angels this year, and b) equal the value of Ervin Santana. It's just not possible. Pitchers who have completed two seasons by age 23 with his stuff and numbers don't come around very often, and trading him now in exchange for mediocrity is such a dumb idea that I can't even believe I'm addressing it. But, that's pretty much my take. Stoneman has already burdened the team with one albatross this off-season (at least the fourth in a continuing series - see also: Erstad, Anderson, and Finley), and if he does any more damage, it may take the franchise a few years to recover. Fortunately for me, were he to make that deal, I'd be rooting for another team, and the Angels lack of success wouldn't bother me.
The basketball team will be #1 in both polls next week following Ohio State's loss to North Carolina last night in what was actually a pretty exciting game. Both teams look pretty damn good, and I wouldn't be shocked if they met in Atlanta in April, unless of course the final four isn't in Atlanta, but I'm not going to look it up, so you can figure out what I mean. Anyway, as noted before, this just means it will be that much more shocking when the UCR Highlanders shock the world on Sunday.
On the gridiron, the coaching staff announced today that Pat Cowan would remain the starter going into the game with the women of troy this weekend. I'm not happy about this. Nothing against Pat Cowan, but I see the team with two identities. They're either a) the pretty mediocre team with Cowan at the helm, or b) the mediocre team with Ben Olson behind center who may actually be really good at times. In other words, Cowan is more of a known quantity, and while Olson coming off an injury may be worse than Cowan, he may be better, and the known quantity that is Cowan will not be enough to beat $C. It's a gamble, but one worth taking. Though quite frankly, the play calling figures to be so conservative with either one that I can't see the Bruins scoring more than 21 points at best. That's probably not going to be enough.
Angels
The rumored supposedly done deal that shall remain nameless looks less and less like a done deal. The HH crew have been commenting on reports that a) Kenny Williams says he hasn't approached anyone about Crede, and b) Scioscia told Figgins he's the third baseman next year. Well, as a wise man once said, well, let's not start sucking each other's dicks quite yet. First, Williams never said that no one else approached him. Yeah, I'm parsing, but that's the way these guys work. Second, who cares what Scioscia told Figgins? Nothing is settled until those guys take the field next year. Of course, either Stoneman or Williams could make some sort of unequivocal statement that no deal will be done involving those players, but they won't because they're GMs, and GMs hedge. It's part of the job.
A reader pointed me to another take over here earlier today. I agree with this part:
If the Figgins-Santana for Crede-Garcia trade goes through, and Matthews, Crede, and Garcia all play up to their ability, Stoneman just might make a few friends in the OC.I disagree with pretty much everything else. Sure, if Garcia, Crede, and Matthews all play at their best, like say, Crede and Matthews repeating last year while Garcia repeats his 2001 season (that was five years ago, folks), it would look like a great deal next year, and I'm sure a lot of people behind the Orange Curtain would be very happy. It would still look awful three years down the line when Santana is a top 10 starter, Crede is hurt, and Garcia is either back to sucking, or pitching for another team for HUGE dollars. Look, there is risk in every deal, and even deals apparently lopsided against you can work out in your favor if everything breaks right, but show me a GM who expects everything to break in his favor every time, and I'll say "I didn't know you were buddies with Allard Baird and David Littlefield".
There is really no one the White Sox would consider trading who could a) help the Angels this year, and b) equal the value of Ervin Santana. It's just not possible. Pitchers who have completed two seasons by age 23 with his stuff and numbers don't come around very often, and trading him now in exchange for mediocrity is such a dumb idea that I can't even believe I'm addressing it. But, that's pretty much my take. Stoneman has already burdened the team with one albatross this off-season (at least the fourth in a continuing series - see also: Erstad, Anderson, and Finley), and if he does any more damage, it may take the franchise a few years to recover. Fortunately for me, were he to make that deal, I'd be rooting for another team, and the Angels lack of success wouldn't bother me.
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
The Night Before
Illinois
Ugh. What a tough game to watch. Stagnant offense, poor shooting, out of control play at times. Rich McBride just looked completely lost, not a good sign for a senior. Jamar Smith is clearly still recovering from his ankle sprain. He was a step slow all night. And this was some of the worst defense I've seen from a Bruce Weber team in a while. Lots of open looks for the Terrapins, and outside of some excellent offensive rebounding, the Illini were not a good team last night. Good effort from the Illinois big men, though. Warren Carter pulled down a ton of boards in the first half, and made the only three pointer before the break. Sean Pruitt finished with nice numbers, but I'd like to see him take it to the basket a little stronger. Brian Carlwell provided a nice spark. He's got a lot of work to do, but he's going to be a good one. But boy, this team really needs Brian Randle back. I thought Calvin Brock played a good game as well. 11 points and 4 rebounds in 19 minutes. Not sure why he didn't get more time. He's their most athletic player with Randle on the bench.
UCLA
Not on TV, but it was nice to see the real leaders getting it done on the offensive end. They combined for 44 points, with the point guards adding another 21. LRMAM hit the boards in the second half, but it looks like he was the only one. The Bruins were killed on the glass by 41-22 margin. That's unacceptable, but having not seen the game, it's tough to see what contributed to that. On the plus side, the Bruins created 23 turn overs, while only guilty of 10 themselves. And 13 of 22 from beyond the arc is going to get it done most of the time. Nice night from Russel Westbrook, including 11 points on 3-3 from three point land. The 0 assists and 2 turnovers aren't much to write home about, though. Of course, this means the Bruins will still be undefeated when UC Riverside shocks the world on Sunday!
On the football front, the Bruins have agreed to meet Florida State in the Emerald Bowl on December 27th. Look, I can't get excited about these games either, and about eight or nine years ago, this would have been a great matchup, but the fact is that going to a bowl game means another full month of practice, and that's too valuable to turn down at the college level.
They still have yet to name a starter for Saturday's game with the women of troy, but after the way the offense operated last game under Cowan, they'd be crazy not to go with Ben Olson. On paper, this is going to be another in a long line of beatdowns. But it's a rivalry game, and stranger things have happened. With their defense, I actually think they have a better chance going into this year's game than they did last year. But I'm not getting my hopes up.
Angels
Still no announcement of the potentially worst trade in franchise history, though people in the comments both here and at Halos Heaven are reporting it's a done deal. Don't know what they could be waiting for. For now I'll still hold out hope that this is not going to go down.
Looking at his BBRef page, Santana's closest comps through age 23 are Ben Sheets and Mark Mulder. How did those two fare in their next two seasons? Sheets had an average age 23 season, going 11-13 with a 4.45 ERA, but exploded the year after that, posting a 2.70 ERA while striking out 264. He's struggled with injuries since. Mulder went 34-16 over his next two seasons, posting era+s of 134 and 136. Of course, he had already established himself as an ace at 23, so he's not as good a comp as Sheets. Regardless, there's no reason to think that Santana won't progress, and trading him before he establishes himself for such dreck as Freddie Garcia is mind-bogglingly insane. Not to mention, Santana has destroyed the A's in his first two seasons, going 6-1 with a 1.55 ERA while allowing fewer than a baserunner per inning. Might want to keep a guy around who simply owns your arch-rival.
Like I said, officially, this deal hasn't gone down yet, so I'm still an Angels fan. For now.
Ugh. What a tough game to watch. Stagnant offense, poor shooting, out of control play at times. Rich McBride just looked completely lost, not a good sign for a senior. Jamar Smith is clearly still recovering from his ankle sprain. He was a step slow all night. And this was some of the worst defense I've seen from a Bruce Weber team in a while. Lots of open looks for the Terrapins, and outside of some excellent offensive rebounding, the Illini were not a good team last night. Good effort from the Illinois big men, though. Warren Carter pulled down a ton of boards in the first half, and made the only three pointer before the break. Sean Pruitt finished with nice numbers, but I'd like to see him take it to the basket a little stronger. Brian Carlwell provided a nice spark. He's got a lot of work to do, but he's going to be a good one. But boy, this team really needs Brian Randle back. I thought Calvin Brock played a good game as well. 11 points and 4 rebounds in 19 minutes. Not sure why he didn't get more time. He's their most athletic player with Randle on the bench.
UCLA
Not on TV, but it was nice to see the real leaders getting it done on the offensive end. They combined for 44 points, with the point guards adding another 21. LRMAM hit the boards in the second half, but it looks like he was the only one. The Bruins were killed on the glass by 41-22 margin. That's unacceptable, but having not seen the game, it's tough to see what contributed to that. On the plus side, the Bruins created 23 turn overs, while only guilty of 10 themselves. And 13 of 22 from beyond the arc is going to get it done most of the time. Nice night from Russel Westbrook, including 11 points on 3-3 from three point land. The 0 assists and 2 turnovers aren't much to write home about, though. Of course, this means the Bruins will still be undefeated when UC Riverside shocks the world on Sunday!
On the football front, the Bruins have agreed to meet Florida State in the Emerald Bowl on December 27th. Look, I can't get excited about these games either, and about eight or nine years ago, this would have been a great matchup, but the fact is that going to a bowl game means another full month of practice, and that's too valuable to turn down at the college level.
They still have yet to name a starter for Saturday's game with the women of troy, but after the way the offense operated last game under Cowan, they'd be crazy not to go with Ben Olson. On paper, this is going to be another in a long line of beatdowns. But it's a rivalry game, and stranger things have happened. With their defense, I actually think they have a better chance going into this year's game than they did last year. But I'm not getting my hopes up.
Angels
Still no announcement of the potentially worst trade in franchise history, though people in the comments both here and at Halos Heaven are reporting it's a done deal. Don't know what they could be waiting for. For now I'll still hold out hope that this is not going to go down.
Looking at his BBRef page, Santana's closest comps through age 23 are Ben Sheets and Mark Mulder. How did those two fare in their next two seasons? Sheets had an average age 23 season, going 11-13 with a 4.45 ERA, but exploded the year after that, posting a 2.70 ERA while striking out 264. He's struggled with injuries since. Mulder went 34-16 over his next two seasons, posting era+s of 134 and 136. Of course, he had already established himself as an ace at 23, so he's not as good a comp as Sheets. Regardless, there's no reason to think that Santana won't progress, and trading him before he establishes himself for such dreck as Freddie Garcia is mind-bogglingly insane. Not to mention, Santana has destroyed the A's in his first two seasons, going 6-1 with a 1.55 ERA while allowing fewer than a baserunner per inning. Might want to keep a guy around who simply owns your arch-rival.
Like I said, officially, this deal hasn't gone down yet, so I'm still an Angels fan. For now.
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
Idiocy
I have never been a Bill Stoneman basher. 2002 goes a long way in my opinion of most of the people in current Angels management, but if the rumors are true, someone needs to steal the keys from this madman as soon as humanly possible. The L.A. Times is reporting that the Angels are discussing a trade of Figgins for Crede. That's the good news. The bad news is that the trade would also include Ervin Santana for Freddie Garcia. That's lunacy.
The difference between the relative values of Crede and Figgins is much lower than the difference between Garcia and Santana when salaries are added in. It's the type of difference that could easily be filled by a Steven Shell, or some other such minor league arm that isn't among the cream of the Angels pitching crop. Why Stoneman would even consider a deal in which he would add a pitcher who has declined each of the last two seasons, and is owed in the neighborhood of $10MM is beyond me. Santana, on the other hand, was at least Garcia's equal last year, will only be 24 years old, and is club controlled for the next four seasons.
I've been an advocate of a Figgins for Crede deal, but not at this price. This is just fucking nuts.
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
Just checking in with a question
Is there anyone other than Gary Matthews Jr., his agent, Bill Stoneman, and fans of other AL West teams who think this deal is good for the Angels? I mean, has any Angels fan anywhere come close to saying that this deal isn't awful?
I think Bill Stoneman may be retarded. Seriously.
I think Bill Stoneman may be retarded. Seriously.
Absolutely Indefensible
The Gary Matthews signing will haunt the Angels into the next decade. Easily one of the three or four dumbest moves in franchise history.
This has basically ruined my entire Thanksgiving weekend.
This has basically ruined my entire Thanksgiving weekend.
Morning Roundup - Updated with Angels news
UCLA
Pretty ugly game last night. Horrendous shooting from anywhere beyond about 8 feet from the basket, and that included the free throw line. The defense was not terrific in the second half outside of a few select possessions, but they were solid when they had to be, and although they gave up what was once a 17 point lead, they never let Kentucky get the lead beyond one posession, and almost every time Kentucky took a lead, the Bruins would run it back out to about a four or five point advantage. Also, give the Bruins credit for taking care of the ball. They only turned it over 8 times, three of those belonging to Darren Collison, who made up for them with seven assists.
They're going to need to shoot the ball a hell of a lot better, though. 2 for 19 from the three point line isn't going to cut it, and 54% from the free throw line isn't much better. A rare below average rebounding night from LRMAM was offset by his 18 points, and Lorenzo Mata, coming off a knee surgery, looked excellent with 11 boards and 12 points. Georgia Tech is on the bill tonight after taking out Memphis. Another good test for the Bruins.
Illinois
Didn't see this one, as it wasn't on TV (and I had a hockey game, but that's another story). Four players scored in double figures, including Rich McBride, who played 27 minutes in his first game of the year. He was 4-10 from beyond the arc, which is OK, but without seeing the game, it's tough to evaluate. Chet Frazier had a great game with 17 points and 10 assists against 2 turnovers in 27 minutes. Nice to see him get some time on the bench with McBride back in the lineup. The numbers were down for Trent Meacham and Calvin Brock, but Sean Pruitt added a double-double. The Illini dominated the glass with a 46-19 rebounding advantage. In fact, more Illini misses were rebounded by the Illini than by Savannah State, which has to be a fairly rare occurrence. The 70% free throw shooting was pretty solid as well. Kind of curious why Brian Carlwell didn't register a shot (though he was obviously fouled three time in the act of shooting). Not much the Illini can do other than beat the teams that are put in front of them. We're a week away from the first real test for the Illini when they face Maryland at the Hall in the Big 10/ACC Challenge.
Angels
The folly continues, as the Angels ramp up their pursuit of one year wonder Gary Matthews Jr., who says the Angels are probably the top team on his list. Rumors have the contract at five years, which is too many for a guy who will be 32 in the first year of the deal, which is already pushing it for a center fielder. He's been above average (barely) exactly three times in his career, and in two of those seasons, it was in limited time. Even in last year's career year (as it's his eighth in the majors, I refuse to call it a break out year). His isolated on base percentage (OBP less batting average), was worse than Chone Figgins', and his numbers were inflated due to his high batting average, which was 14% higher than his career high (not his average, but his HIGH!) coming into this season. He hit all of 20 home runs in a hitters' park, and didn't even slug .500. He has the potential to be a pretty good player over the next couple of years, but he's doubtful to be worth what the Angels will pay him, and he's virtually guaranteed to incredibly overpaid over the last couple years of the deal.
Angels fans, cross your fingers and hope the gold mine that the Cubs are apparently sitting on is still producing. Their downright crazy off-season may be the Angels only hope at this point. This would not be a good signing for the Angels. I might rather take Reggie Willits straight up over GMJ.
UPDATE - Fox is reporting it's a done deal at 5 years, $50MM. He'll be 36 in the last year. This move is indefensible. Dumbest move since the Easley for Greg Gohr trade. Just pathetic. Fuck this fucking team.
Me
Leaving today for Toledo (four hours) to visit my sister for Thanksgiving. Then on Friday I'll be driving from Toledo to Evansville, IN (eight hours) for a wedding, then back to Chicago (six hours) on Sunday. It's going to be a long weekend. As a result, posting could be on the light side. Of course, I'll probably be bringing my computer, and with the rehearsal dinner and reception, there's an increased possibility for drunk posting, so you never know.
Pretty ugly game last night. Horrendous shooting from anywhere beyond about 8 feet from the basket, and that included the free throw line. The defense was not terrific in the second half outside of a few select possessions, but they were solid when they had to be, and although they gave up what was once a 17 point lead, they never let Kentucky get the lead beyond one posession, and almost every time Kentucky took a lead, the Bruins would run it back out to about a four or five point advantage. Also, give the Bruins credit for taking care of the ball. They only turned it over 8 times, three of those belonging to Darren Collison, who made up for them with seven assists.
They're going to need to shoot the ball a hell of a lot better, though. 2 for 19 from the three point line isn't going to cut it, and 54% from the free throw line isn't much better. A rare below average rebounding night from LRMAM was offset by his 18 points, and Lorenzo Mata, coming off a knee surgery, looked excellent with 11 boards and 12 points. Georgia Tech is on the bill tonight after taking out Memphis. Another good test for the Bruins.
Illinois
Didn't see this one, as it wasn't on TV (and I had a hockey game, but that's another story). Four players scored in double figures, including Rich McBride, who played 27 minutes in his first game of the year. He was 4-10 from beyond the arc, which is OK, but without seeing the game, it's tough to evaluate. Chet Frazier had a great game with 17 points and 10 assists against 2 turnovers in 27 minutes. Nice to see him get some time on the bench with McBride back in the lineup. The numbers were down for Trent Meacham and Calvin Brock, but Sean Pruitt added a double-double. The Illini dominated the glass with a 46-19 rebounding advantage. In fact, more Illini misses were rebounded by the Illini than by Savannah State, which has to be a fairly rare occurrence. The 70% free throw shooting was pretty solid as well. Kind of curious why Brian Carlwell didn't register a shot (though he was obviously fouled three time in the act of shooting). Not much the Illini can do other than beat the teams that are put in front of them. We're a week away from the first real test for the Illini when they face Maryland at the Hall in the Big 10/ACC Challenge.
Angels
The folly continues, as the Angels ramp up their pursuit of one year wonder Gary Matthews Jr., who says the Angels are probably the top team on his list. Rumors have the contract at five years, which is too many for a guy who will be 32 in the first year of the deal, which is already pushing it for a center fielder. He's been above average (barely) exactly three times in his career, and in two of those seasons, it was in limited time. Even in last year's career year (as it's his eighth in the majors, I refuse to call it a break out year). His isolated on base percentage (OBP less batting average), was worse than Chone Figgins', and his numbers were inflated due to his high batting average, which was 14% higher than his career high (not his average, but his HIGH!) coming into this season. He hit all of 20 home runs in a hitters' park, and didn't even slug .500. He has the potential to be a pretty good player over the next couple of years, but he's doubtful to be worth what the Angels will pay him, and he's virtually guaranteed to incredibly overpaid over the last couple years of the deal.
Angels fans, cross your fingers and hope the gold mine that the Cubs are apparently sitting on is still producing. Their downright crazy off-season may be the Angels only hope at this point. This would not be a good signing for the Angels. I might rather take Reggie Willits straight up over GMJ.
UPDATE - Fox is reporting it's a done deal at 5 years, $50MM. He'll be 36 in the last year. This move is indefensible. Dumbest move since the Easley for Greg Gohr trade. Just pathetic. Fuck this fucking team.
Me
Leaving today for Toledo (four hours) to visit my sister for Thanksgiving. Then on Friday I'll be driving from Toledo to Evansville, IN (eight hours) for a wedding, then back to Chicago (six hours) on Sunday. It's going to be a long weekend. As a result, posting could be on the light side. Of course, I'll probably be bringing my computer, and with the rehearsal dinner and reception, there's an increased possibility for drunk posting, so you never know.
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
Hoops
UCLA at Kentucky tonight. Nice to see Aaron Afflalo get his jumper back last night. At times the game was pretty sloppy, and it seemed to be called EXTREMELY tight against UCLA. Part of me thinks that Ben Howland requested that. There were a lot of carries called that you never see called during the regular season. A lot of very ticky tack fouls called against the Bruins that you don't even see during a Pac 10 game. And that's fine with me. Get them used to that. Better to have that happen in a game in which they were going to win easily. Russel Westbrook looked very solid in my opinion. He only had three points and two assists, but he showed quickness and good decision making. If he can contribute this season as much as Collison did last season, the Bruins will be in good shape. Tonight is a measurement game.
The Illini continue the soft part of their schedule with Savannah State. Savannah hasn't played anyone of note yet, but they're 5-0, and at least they'll bring a winning attitude to the Assembly Hall. The Illini backcourt has been terrific to start the season, and no one has surprised more than Calvin Brock. Rich McBride returns to the lineup, but with Brock, Chet Frazier, and Trent Meacham playing so well, it may be tough for him to get minutes. The competition for playing can do nothing but help the team. And if these guys continue to exceed expectations, look for coach Weber's reputation as an excellent developer of guard talent to continue to improve. One of the issues with this team, as noted by the Big Ten Wonk, has been defensive rebounding. We'll see if coach Weber makes that a point of emphasis tonight.
The Illini continue the soft part of their schedule with Savannah State. Savannah hasn't played anyone of note yet, but they're 5-0, and at least they'll bring a winning attitude to the Assembly Hall. The Illini backcourt has been terrific to start the season, and no one has surprised more than Calvin Brock. Rich McBride returns to the lineup, but with Brock, Chet Frazier, and Trent Meacham playing so well, it may be tough for him to get minutes. The competition for playing can do nothing but help the team. And if these guys continue to exceed expectations, look for coach Weber's reputation as an excellent developer of guard talent to continue to improve. One of the issues with this team, as noted by the Big Ten Wonk, has been defensive rebounding. We'll see if coach Weber makes that a point of emphasis tonight.
Monday, November 20, 2006
Angels Ink Justin Speier
Four years, $18MM. My gut instinct is to criticize multi-year, multi-million dollar deals for relief pitchers, especially relief pitchers that aren't closers. The Angels have made a habit of getting pretty good performances from scrap-heap guys over the last six or seven years, then letting them loose on other teams just before they ran out of good pitches (Mark Petkovsek is the poster boy for this, but they got good seasons out of Ben Weber, Al Levine, and Lou Pote before they fell off the map as well). But the Angels bucked this trend last year with the signing of Hector Carrasco (tempered somewhat by the original plan to start him before signing Jeff Weaver, and before the emergence of Jered Weaver). So for the second year in a row, the Angels move to shore up their bullpen via free agency, signing the best free agent middle reliever on the market.
Speier is the son of former major leaguer Chris Speier, which pretty much means absolutely nothing, but I had his baseball card as a kid, so I thought I'd throw that out there. Basically this move drops JC Romero completely out of the picture (mercifully), as Speier has killed lefties the last couple of years, and drops Carrasco and Donnelly back a spot in the bullpen, assuming Donnelly returns (Stoneman has said he likely will). That won't make Donnelly very happy, but it does give the Angels the top bullpen in the AL heading into the season. As we all know, bullpens aren't built on paper, so that guarantees the Angels absolutely nothing but peace of mind for the first couple weeks of April.
It also increases the possibility that the Angels could include Scot Shields in a deal for a big bat this off-season. He's been in the mind of every team that has tried to deal with Stoneman the last few seasons, and now that the Angels have another guy capable of pitching the 8th, Shields could be used to sweeten the pot for a potential slugger, especially in light of the fact that they just removed the other best alternative from the market. Shields hits free agency next season (I think), and if this deal is an indication of his value, he'll probably command a deal of similar length at something closer to $6MM per. That may be more than Stoneman is willing to shell out.
As the Rev pointed out, this could be a case of Stoneman taking into account where the budget is going for the next couple of years and spending accordingly. At the beginning of the 2005 season, the Angels had expensive players at every infield position except for third base while employing a fairly cheap bullpen. Catcher, First, and Second just got a lot cheaper in the last year, and Stoneman probably feels like he has money to spend on a part of the roster that a) needs help, and b) saved them money over the last few years. That's fairly astute analysis, and I wish I'd thought of it.
Against my prior judgment, I like this deal. It gives the Angels options heading into the season, and should they choose not to exercise them, they're going to have an excellent bullpen yet again. This has been Bud Black's forte, so it make Mike Butcher's job a little easier as well. And if they make a move including Shields, they just paid a couple million to enhance his value.
Speier is the son of former major leaguer Chris Speier, which pretty much means absolutely nothing, but I had his baseball card as a kid, so I thought I'd throw that out there. Basically this move drops JC Romero completely out of the picture (mercifully), as Speier has killed lefties the last couple of years, and drops Carrasco and Donnelly back a spot in the bullpen, assuming Donnelly returns (Stoneman has said he likely will). That won't make Donnelly very happy, but it does give the Angels the top bullpen in the AL heading into the season. As we all know, bullpens aren't built on paper, so that guarantees the Angels absolutely nothing but peace of mind for the first couple weeks of April.
It also increases the possibility that the Angels could include Scot Shields in a deal for a big bat this off-season. He's been in the mind of every team that has tried to deal with Stoneman the last few seasons, and now that the Angels have another guy capable of pitching the 8th, Shields could be used to sweeten the pot for a potential slugger, especially in light of the fact that they just removed the other best alternative from the market. Shields hits free agency next season (I think), and if this deal is an indication of his value, he'll probably command a deal of similar length at something closer to $6MM per. That may be more than Stoneman is willing to shell out.
As the Rev pointed out, this could be a case of Stoneman taking into account where the budget is going for the next couple of years and spending accordingly. At the beginning of the 2005 season, the Angels had expensive players at every infield position except for third base while employing a fairly cheap bullpen. Catcher, First, and Second just got a lot cheaper in the last year, and Stoneman probably feels like he has money to spend on a part of the roster that a) needs help, and b) saved them money over the last few years. That's fairly astute analysis, and I wish I'd thought of it.
Against my prior judgment, I like this deal. It gives the Angels options heading into the season, and should they choose not to exercise them, they're going to have an excellent bullpen yet again. This has been Bud Black's forte, so it make Mike Butcher's job a little easier as well. And if they make a move including Shields, they just paid a couple million to enhance his value.
The first big test
It's likely to come tomorrow night for the UCLA Bruins, who are slated to take on Kentucky if they can get by potential giant killers Chaminade, who took down top ranked Virginia in this tournament a little over twenty years ago. This should be a pretty good indicator of where the Bruins are at this point in the season. The field is loaded outside of the hosts. Joining the Bruins and Wildcats in Maui are Depaul, Georgia Tech, Memphis, Purdue, and Oklahoma. That's a very solid field. The Bruins could also meet Memphis in the final, the next highest ranked team behind the Bruins in the top 25.
Tournaments like these are excellent early season tests, and I commend Ben Howland for taking the Bruins to this event. I've been critical of his scheduling history in the past, and there are still a few issues I have with some of the comments he's made in the past (most notably advocating a 16 game conference schedule). A young team with a major target in it's back needs early mathups like this to help them get used to the type of intensity they're going to face from opponents every night this season.
Speaking of major upsets in holiday tournaments in Hawaii, we're coming up on the 17th anniversary of perhaps the most underrated upset in the history of college basketball. On Christmas night in Honolulu, the UC Riverside Highlanders took down then-undefeated and fourth ranked Iowa. They didn't do this on a luck three pointer at the last second. The Highlanders canned 21 threes during the game en route to a 110-92 victory. It remains probably the biggest win in UCR hoops history (it should have been overshadowed by a D-2 National Championship in 1995, but I'd rather not get into that). I only call it underrated because, for example, a google search for "Chaminade Virginia" turns up a ton of hits on that game, while I had to search for about fifteen minutes to find ONE mention of the game (OK, I found two, but one was from me talking about it on another message board). Anyway, here's a link to a brief mention of the game. You'll need to search through a bit, but it's there.
UCLA plays UC Riverside later this season. In 2001, I walked a mile and a half in a Western Chicago suburb, at night, in December, to watch the Highlanders take on the Bruins. UCR actually led by one early in the second half before being blown out, but hey, it was a Lavin team, which meant there was always a chance for an upset. This is the the only match-up in which I'll ever root against UCLA.
Tournaments like these are excellent early season tests, and I commend Ben Howland for taking the Bruins to this event. I've been critical of his scheduling history in the past, and there are still a few issues I have with some of the comments he's made in the past (most notably advocating a 16 game conference schedule). A young team with a major target in it's back needs early mathups like this to help them get used to the type of intensity they're going to face from opponents every night this season.
Speaking of major upsets in holiday tournaments in Hawaii, we're coming up on the 17th anniversary of perhaps the most underrated upset in the history of college basketball. On Christmas night in Honolulu, the UC Riverside Highlanders took down then-undefeated and fourth ranked Iowa. They didn't do this on a luck three pointer at the last second. The Highlanders canned 21 threes during the game en route to a 110-92 victory. It remains probably the biggest win in UCR hoops history (it should have been overshadowed by a D-2 National Championship in 1995, but I'd rather not get into that). I only call it underrated because, for example, a google search for "Chaminade Virginia" turns up a ton of hits on that game, while I had to search for about fifteen minutes to find ONE mention of the game (OK, I found two, but one was from me talking about it on another message board). Anyway, here's a link to a brief mention of the game. You'll need to search through a bit, but it's there.
UCLA plays UC Riverside later this season. In 2001, I walked a mile and a half in a Western Chicago suburb, at night, in December, to watch the Highlanders take on the Bruins. UCR actually led by one early in the second half before being blown out, but hey, it was a Lavin team, which meant there was always a chance for an upset. This is the the only match-up in which I'll ever root against UCLA.
Saturday, November 18, 2006
Continuity
I'm not sure if that's the right word, but so be it. Anyway, Wedding Crashers has been on HBO about a million times in the last couple of months, and after watching bits and pieces of it over and over and over again, I have a couple of questions:
- The day of the Cleary wedding, the schedule apparently includes: The wedding, the reception (including pictures), a boat trip to their home on the coast, a football game, so hangin' around time, then dinner. My question is, what time was this wedding, 8:30 in the morning? Weddings rarely start before noon, and the reception was off-site, which means it probably didn't start until 1:00 or so (at the very earliest). You gotta figure that went at least four hours, so now, if everything is breaking their way, it's 5:00. I gotta figure that rounding everyone up and sending them home, then getting on the boat and cruising to their pad after everyone has left is at least another hour. So now it's 6:00, they've probably been up since 6:00 am for an early wedding, and they're still going to play football before cleaning up for dinner? Without even questioning whether they'd even eat dinner on a night like that (I mean, if you have an afternoon reception, chances are you aren't having a big sit-down dinner that night). I find that all highly improbable. Also, no one was drunk, which makes it probably the lamest wedding reception I've ever seen.
- After the falling out, Owen Wilson and Vince Vaughan don't talk to each other for weeks/months. Umm, aren't these guys business partners? How can you just not talk to your business partner for that long and still have a business?
- After Vince Vaughan marries Isla Fisher, the four main characters drive away, impliedly to crash another wedding. Wouldn't you think they'd have, ya know, a reception of their own to attend? (and they were definitely leaving the wedding, because it was only like 2:00 pm).
- Why wasn't the chick who played their secretary at the beginning in the movie more? She was the hottest one! Bastards.
Friday, November 17, 2006
Rivalries
Tomorrow is one of football's traditional "rivalry weeks" in which many of the top rivalries will play out in college football stadiums across the country. Michigan v. Ohio State is obviously getting the lion's share of hype, but we shouldn't forget tomorrow's other traditional rivalries, like the Iron Bowl (Auburn v. Alabama), the Land Grant Trophy (MSU v. PSU), and other traditional rivalries like Purdue v. Indiana, Illinois v. Northwestern, Montana v. Montana State (I'm serious - you might not think it's a big deal, but that game is HUGE in Montana, and I have a lot of family there, mostly Montana grads).
But the thing I like most about this week is that every year it reminds why I love the Pac 10. There is no other conference in America with such natural rivalries, all within the same conference. Every Pac 10 team has a natural rival that trumps all other rivals, and all of those are conference games, making the game that much more important (don't kid yourself into thinking U$C v. ND is bigger than U$C v. UCLA). Here's my own "pulled from ass" rivalry criteria:
So let's break down the Pac 10 rivalries:
But the thing I like most about this week is that every year it reminds why I love the Pac 10. There is no other conference in America with such natural rivalries, all within the same conference. Every Pac 10 team has a natural rival that trumps all other rivals, and all of those are conference games, making the game that much more important (don't kid yourself into thinking U$C v. ND is bigger than U$C v. UCLA). Here's my own "pulled from ass" rivalry criteria:
- Teams should both be in-state, or at the very least, from bordering states. Even better if they're in the same metropolitan area.
- Teams should be in the same conference. For years, the Rose Bowl almost always came down to the UCLA v. U$C game, and it always elevated the rivalry.
- Teams should both be competitive, as in, they should both make appearances in the top 25 at least every other year or so (for example, this sort of eliminates Indiana v. Purdue and Illinois v. Northwestern).
- Most importantly, the two teams' biggest rivals should be one another. For example, Michigan v. Michigan State is a good rivalry, but Michigan has a bigger rivalry with Ohio State, which means it's not a great rivalry. Hell, people at Illinois thought of Michigan as one of our big rivals. Geez, it's not a rivalry if your "rival" doesn't really care about you.
So let's break down the Pac 10 rivalries:
- U$C v. UCLA - The only negative might be that people on the back East may think that the ND v. U$C rivalry is more important than U$C v. UCLA. People back East are stupid.
- Arizona v. Arizona State - No question on 1, 2, and 4. Arizona has been down recently, but they had a good run in the '90s. ASU has played for the national championship within the last ten years, and they seem to make people think they're good before just about every season. Their recent tank jobs have diminished this one a bit. Still, it's better than most Big 10 rivalries.
- The Civil War - Oregon v. Oregon State - Both schools have been in BCS bowls in this decade, and while Oregon is usually better, they've both been not-awful for a while now. 20 years ago, no one would have cared, but nowadays, it's a big game. And it's got a cool name.
- The Big Game - Cal v. Stanford - Not quite as good as U$C v. UCLA, but Cal has been very good lately, and Stanford has been to a relatively recent Rose Bowl. It's got some damn fine history as well.
- The Apple Cup - Washington v. Wazzu - Washington has been down recently, but the rivalry has been buoyed by a surprisingly competitive Washington State team.
Illinois Basketball
To this point, I've more or less neglected the 2006-2007 Fighting Illini, for no reason other than I've been busy with a bunch of other stuff lately. Also, for the first time in a few years, I expect the Illini to simply be good rather than very good, or flat out fantastic. While I would have been thrilled with this lineup coming off the '98-'99 season, it's not exactly marquee material just two seasons removed from '04-'05. That's not their fault, or course.
For the first time in a few years, I don't really think the Illini have anyone that's truly reliable heading into the season. For example, last year we all knew that at the very least, Dee and Augustine could win the Illini a fair number of games even without much help. There is no one like that on this team, and as such, predicting their finish is pretty much a crap-shoot. They're young, with only two seniors expected to get significant playing time, and neither among their most important players (Warren Carter and Marcus Arnold). This team has a lot of question marks.
The biggest questions, in my mind, are:
For the first time in a few years, I don't really think the Illini have anyone that's truly reliable heading into the season. For example, last year we all knew that at the very least, Dee and Augustine could win the Illini a fair number of games even without much help. There is no one like that on this team, and as such, predicting their finish is pretty much a crap-shoot. They're young, with only two seniors expected to get significant playing time, and neither among their most important players (Warren Carter and Marcus Arnold). This team has a lot of question marks.
The biggest questions, in my mind, are:
- How much has Sean Pruitt improved, and with Augustine gone, can he become a reliable low post scorer and rebounder? I think he has to average about 14 and 8 for the Illini to be successful.
- Can Chester Frazier become a legitimate threat to score? He doesn't need to replace Dee's scoring, but he at least needs to be able to draw a defender to free up someone inside or Jamar Smith.
- Can Jamar Smith (when he returns from injury) be a more consistent scorer. Last year Jamar was a dead eye shooter who could put together a big game under the right circumstances. He needs to be able to put up big games under the wrong circumstances if the Illini are going to be successful.
- Can Brian Randle get healthy, and if he can, will he be able to shoot? For much of the off-season, the non-recruiting discussion centered around how Randle had improved his jumper. We know he can defend. We know he can fly. What he needs to do is consistently hit 17-18 footers to pull his defenders out the perimeter before he puts the ball on the floor.
Thursday, November 16, 2006
BYU 69; UCLA 82
I don't know about you, but that seemed like kind of a strange game to me. UCLA dominated early, then BYU just went freaking nuts, hitting seven of their eight three point attempts in the first half, and it's not like they were all open looks, on their way to opening up a nine point lead. I'd like to say UCLA made a methodical comeback, but it didn't really feel like that watching the game. But when you look at the game flow chart, their scoring line is almost dead straight. No real big runs, or real big lulls offensively. They scored at a very consistent pace, while BYU made a couple of big runs, but didn't really do much once they got to about 60 points. Technically, the Bruins went on an 11-0 run which started with about seven minutes to go in the game, but they did it with defense, and that run took five minutes to complete, at which the game was, for all intents and purposes, over.
I thought they looked a little nervous at first. Both Afflalo and Shipp jacked up some pretty questionable shots, and Mike Roll followed suit when he entered the game. BYU took advantage of those poor posessions to build their lead. But UCLA settled down, started to run their offense, and got a fair amount easy baskets.
The stars of the game for the Bruins were clearly Darren Collison and LRMAM. Collison went for 16 and ten assists, including a couple of second half three pointers, and a terrific drive at the end of the first half on a screen and roll. The defender turned his back, and Collison was a blur on the way to the basket.
LRMAM notched the first of what will likely be many double doubles this season (mmmm....double doubles) with 24 and 10 rebounds. He mixed in solid defense as well. Highlights included a flying dunk to finish a break, and a great second half baseline move that ended with him reaching from behind the backboard to lay it in, pushing the lead to nine with just over three minutes to play.
BYU is no pushover, and the Bruins overcame some early adversity to really put them away in the second half. And let's not forget, the early scoop was that they would have trouble with BYU center Trent Plaisted with his size and skill inside compared to the lack of same for the Bruins. He went 3-7 from the field, scored only seven points, and was in foul trouble much of the night. I think that's a good sign that they'll be able to guard the interior. Not a bad start against a team that many are picking in their field of 65. Make no mistake, I think this Bruins team can play MUCH MUCH better than they did last night. But still, it's a nice way to kick off the season.
I thought they looked a little nervous at first. Both Afflalo and Shipp jacked up some pretty questionable shots, and Mike Roll followed suit when he entered the game. BYU took advantage of those poor posessions to build their lead. But UCLA settled down, started to run their offense, and got a fair amount easy baskets.
The stars of the game for the Bruins were clearly Darren Collison and LRMAM. Collison went for 16 and ten assists, including a couple of second half three pointers, and a terrific drive at the end of the first half on a screen and roll. The defender turned his back, and Collison was a blur on the way to the basket.
LRMAM notched the first of what will likely be many double doubles this season (mmmm....double doubles) with 24 and 10 rebounds. He mixed in solid defense as well. Highlights included a flying dunk to finish a break, and a great second half baseline move that ended with him reaching from behind the backboard to lay it in, pushing the lead to nine with just over three minutes to play.
BYU is no pushover, and the Bruins overcame some early adversity to really put them away in the second half. And let's not forget, the early scoop was that they would have trouble with BYU center Trent Plaisted with his size and skill inside compared to the lack of same for the Bruins. He went 3-7 from the field, scored only seven points, and was in foul trouble much of the night. I think that's a good sign that they'll be able to guard the interior. Not a bad start against a team that many are picking in their field of 65. Make no mistake, I think this Bruins team can play MUCH MUCH better than they did last night. But still, it's a nice way to kick off the season.
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
Thank God it's basketball season
It's finally here. With the Kings having a less than successful year, and UCLA football being UCLA football, the wait for basketball season has been particularly excruciating.
My gut feeling is that this team is going to be just as good as last year's team. I think they'll be more consistent. Last year's team at their best would probably beat this year's team at their best, but I think this year's team will play at a higher level more often than they did last year. A lot of that inconsistency was due to the fact that so many minutes went to freshmen, and a fair amount was to due to Ryan Hollins, the poster child for inconsistency (who took that title from Michael Fey, finally found a way to be consistently bad). But athletic seven footers don't grow on trees, and when Hollins was on his game, he really made a big impact. They'll miss that this year.
I'm especially curious to see how how much Ryan Wright, LRMAM, and Alfred Aboya have improved over the summer. One benefit to playing college basketball in Los Angeles is that if you hang around during the summer, there are a lot of opportunities to play pick-up games and test yourself against NBA level competition. I thought last season that these three especially, with a lot of raw ability, would really benefit from those opportunities (as it appeared Mata had last year before his injuries). If they all have made some big strides, the UCLA front line could be fantastic. I don't need to say anything about LRMAM, but Aboya showed flashes last year where he could blow by the occasional defender from the perimeter. Physically, Ryan Wright has the type of body that should allow him to be a force in the paint. If those two step up, and if Mata can return from his knee surgery, the Bruins are going to be very solid inside.
The return of Josh Shipp is also another key. Word is that before last year, he was outplaying Farmar and Afflalo, but obviously the injury to his hip took him out for most of the season. He's healthy, and his scoring ability is something that the Bruins really lacked last year. I'm really looking forward to seeing him on the floor.
Looking forward to seeing Keefe and Westbrook as well, but frankly, I don't expect major impacts from the freshmen this year, save for a game or two when they really step up, as seems to happen to every freshman at some point. The top 8 are pretty solid, and should dominate the minutes. Anything they get from the freshmen should be gravy.
UCLA basketball is finally back where it belongs.
My gut feeling is that this team is going to be just as good as last year's team. I think they'll be more consistent. Last year's team at their best would probably beat this year's team at their best, but I think this year's team will play at a higher level more often than they did last year. A lot of that inconsistency was due to the fact that so many minutes went to freshmen, and a fair amount was to due to Ryan Hollins, the poster child for inconsistency (who took that title from Michael Fey, finally found a way to be consistently bad). But athletic seven footers don't grow on trees, and when Hollins was on his game, he really made a big impact. They'll miss that this year.
I'm especially curious to see how how much Ryan Wright, LRMAM, and Alfred Aboya have improved over the summer. One benefit to playing college basketball in Los Angeles is that if you hang around during the summer, there are a lot of opportunities to play pick-up games and test yourself against NBA level competition. I thought last season that these three especially, with a lot of raw ability, would really benefit from those opportunities (as it appeared Mata had last year before his injuries). If they all have made some big strides, the UCLA front line could be fantastic. I don't need to say anything about LRMAM, but Aboya showed flashes last year where he could blow by the occasional defender from the perimeter. Physically, Ryan Wright has the type of body that should allow him to be a force in the paint. If those two step up, and if Mata can return from his knee surgery, the Bruins are going to be very solid inside.
The return of Josh Shipp is also another key. Word is that before last year, he was outplaying Farmar and Afflalo, but obviously the injury to his hip took him out for most of the season. He's healthy, and his scoring ability is something that the Bruins really lacked last year. I'm really looking forward to seeing him on the floor.
Looking forward to seeing Keefe and Westbrook as well, but frankly, I don't expect major impacts from the freshmen this year, save for a game or two when they really step up, as seems to happen to every freshman at some point. The top 8 are pretty solid, and should dominate the minutes. Anything they get from the freshmen should be gravy.
UCLA basketball is finally back where it belongs.
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
Angels going after Soriano
Not surprising. Rotoworld is reporting that the Angels have offered $80MM over six years, consistent with their strategy of making a big offer early in an attempt to avoid a bidding war. As the Times pointed out the other day, sometimes this nets you a Cy Young winner, and sometimes it nets you Mo Vaughn (allow me to digress for a moment, but I had nothing personal against Vaughn until the Percival comments. The one season where he was remotely healthy, he was a great hitter for the Angels. I can't blame a guy for getting hurt, so I don't think that was an awful move for the Angels, but it certainly ended unfortunately).
I'm not exactly a big Soriano booster, so if they were to sign him, I'd learn to live with it, and probably come to like it, but it's not going to kill me if he turns them down. I've been over this again and again, but the reason the Angels lost the AL West last year was not because of a lack of offense. They lost the AL West because they could not consistently catch and throw the baseball. That isn't to say that they had a good offense. They didn't. But the defense is what did them in. Why do I bring that up? Because according to the Times, the Angels may be considering playing him at second base and moving Kendrick to first. If the Angels sign Soriano, they have two legitimate options*:
Ya know, I've been pretty hard on John Lackey and Ervin Santana for nibbling around the strike zone and trying to strike everyone out instead of getting early count outs. If the Angels put out the defense laid out in option one, I'd understand why they may not want to let opposing hitters put the ball in play. And to be fair, if Soriano goes somewhere else, none of this matters. If the Angels make a move for a center fielder in addition to Soriano, the analysis changes. If someone gets hurt in spring training, the analysis changes. What concerns me is that the Angels might even consider option one. It simply makes no sense.
*Note, options subject to change based on subsequent free agent signings.
I'm not exactly a big Soriano booster, so if they were to sign him, I'd learn to live with it, and probably come to like it, but it's not going to kill me if he turns them down. I've been over this again and again, but the reason the Angels lost the AL West last year was not because of a lack of offense. They lost the AL West because they could not consistently catch and throw the baseball. That isn't to say that they had a good offense. They didn't. But the defense is what did them in. Why do I bring that up? Because according to the Times, the Angels may be considering playing him at second base and moving Kendrick to first. If the Angels sign Soriano, they have two legitimate options*:
- Kotchman or Morales at first, Kendrick at second, Soriano in center, Rivera in left, GA at DH; or
- Kendrick at first; Soriano at second; Rivera in center; Anderson in left; and Kotchman or Morales at DH (or another bat, should they sign one).
Ya know, I've been pretty hard on John Lackey and Ervin Santana for nibbling around the strike zone and trying to strike everyone out instead of getting early count outs. If the Angels put out the defense laid out in option one, I'd understand why they may not want to let opposing hitters put the ball in play. And to be fair, if Soriano goes somewhere else, none of this matters. If the Angels make a move for a center fielder in addition to Soriano, the analysis changes. If someone gets hurt in spring training, the analysis changes. What concerns me is that the Angels might even consider option one. It simply makes no sense.
*Note, options subject to change based on subsequent free agent signings.
Saturday, November 11, 2006
Back to the Midwest tomorrow
Back to the cold. Back to work (new job). Kinda sucks really.
So how did I spend my last few weeks?
Countless visits to the hospital (my dad's a lot better, thanks)
4 rounds of golf
3 trips to court (don't ask)
2 visits to Indian casinos
2 trips to In-N-Out (I know, only two)
2 dinners at a really good Mexican food restaurant
1 wedding (not mine), including reception and rehearsal dinner
1 trip to Palm Springs (for the wedding)
1 trip to San Diego (saw Borat with an old college roommate)
1 Kings home game
1 high school football game
1 meet up with Welch, Halofan, the Chronicler, Cupie, and Steve Smith.
1 trip to the UCR bookstore
A fairly eventful couple of weeks, I guess. Midday flight tomorrow means missing most of the days' college football, which sucks, but it is what it is.
So how did I spend my last few weeks?
Countless visits to the hospital (my dad's a lot better, thanks)
4 rounds of golf
3 trips to court (don't ask)
2 visits to Indian casinos
2 trips to In-N-Out (I know, only two)
2 dinners at a really good Mexican food restaurant
1 wedding (not mine), including reception and rehearsal dinner
1 trip to Palm Springs (for the wedding)
1 trip to San Diego (saw Borat with an old college roommate)
1 Kings home game
1 high school football game
1 meet up with Welch, Halofan, the Chronicler, Cupie, and Steve Smith.
1 trip to the UCR bookstore
A fairly eventful couple of weeks, I guess. Midday flight tomorrow means missing most of the days' college football, which sucks, but it is what it is.
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Bud Black to the Padres
Well, this stings a little bit, but it wasn't unexpected. Bud Black has accepted an offer from the Padres to be their next manager. It's the job he's been waiting for, and probably just about the only one he would have taken in the next few years. Good luck to Bud and the Padres.
What's this mean for the Angels? Under Black, the Angels have developed Jarrod Washburn (who actually started under the previous regime), John Lackey, Ervin Santana, and Joe Saunders. He was able to get better performances than he should have gotten out of Ramon Ortiz and Kevin Appier in his tenure. Interestingly, following the World Championship in 2002, the Angels only had one (that's right, 1) above average year from a starter in the next two seasons. Of course, they turned that trend around in 2005 and 2006, winning a Cy Young, and producing eight above average seasons in ten rotation spots (if you consider Colon/Weaver/Saunders as one rotation slot - all three were below average last season).
But Black's legacy with the Angels will the success of the bullpen under his tenure, always above average and frequently at the top of the league. He got productive seasons out of such luminaries as Lou Pote, Al Levine, Ben Weber, Brendan Donnelly, Mark Petkovsek, and others. That's not exactly a hall of fame waiting list. Add those to terrific seasons out of Scot Shields, Frankie Rodriguez, and Troy Percival, and well, his successor will have his work cut out for him. Bullpens are notoriously unreliable from one year to the next. Black and Scioscia hit on a formula that appeared to effectively minimize that volatility. Hopefully Scioscia can find a replacement who can fill that role with the same effectiveness.
In addition, Scioscia and his coaches have always seemed to be on the same page. His relationship with Black has, from the outside, appeared to be fairly close. Can he find a replacement who fits into the Angel family just as well as Black? We'll see. Who will it be? Hell if I know. Check this Halos Heaven thread for speculation.
What's this mean for the Angels? Under Black, the Angels have developed Jarrod Washburn (who actually started under the previous regime), John Lackey, Ervin Santana, and Joe Saunders. He was able to get better performances than he should have gotten out of Ramon Ortiz and Kevin Appier in his tenure. Interestingly, following the World Championship in 2002, the Angels only had one (that's right, 1) above average year from a starter in the next two seasons. Of course, they turned that trend around in 2005 and 2006, winning a Cy Young, and producing eight above average seasons in ten rotation spots (if you consider Colon/Weaver/Saunders as one rotation slot - all three were below average last season).
But Black's legacy with the Angels will the success of the bullpen under his tenure, always above average and frequently at the top of the league. He got productive seasons out of such luminaries as Lou Pote, Al Levine, Ben Weber, Brendan Donnelly, Mark Petkovsek, and others. That's not exactly a hall of fame waiting list. Add those to terrific seasons out of Scot Shields, Frankie Rodriguez, and Troy Percival, and well, his successor will have his work cut out for him. Bullpens are notoriously unreliable from one year to the next. Black and Scioscia hit on a formula that appeared to effectively minimize that volatility. Hopefully Scioscia can find a replacement who can fill that role with the same effectiveness.
In addition, Scioscia and his coaches have always seemed to be on the same page. His relationship with Black has, from the outside, appeared to be fairly close. Can he find a replacement who fits into the Angel family just as well as Black? We'll see. Who will it be? Hell if I know. Check this Halos Heaven thread for speculation.
Kings 6; Lanche 5
Man, what an exciting game. I mean really entertaining. Just enough bad goaltending to lead to a lot of goals, and just enough good goaltending to remind everyone that goaltending is really hard. Nice effort by Avery, and underrated play by Koptitar to steal the puck and set up the Thornton goal.
And oh yeah, it's election night. I don't do a lot of political stuff, because there are a lot of people who do it a lot better, and I don't want to alienate anyone. But just take a look at the sidebar. Yeah, I've had worse nights.
And oh yeah, it's election night. I don't do a lot of political stuff, because there are a lot of people who do it a lot better, and I don't want to alienate anyone. But just take a look at the sidebar. Yeah, I've had worse nights.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)