Chief Wahoo's Trail of Tears

Indians one of three identified to be options for Josh Willingham

2011-12-08T12:44:00.001-08:00

So, let's see if my introduction to logic class still works.

1) Susan Slusser of the San Francisco Chronicle has tweeted that the Indians are one of three teams (the others being the Twins and Rockies) that are most likely to sign Josh Willingham.
2) I like Josh Willingham. He is a good player. He's an above average and generally underappreciated hitter who has put up solid numbers in some dreadful hitting parks (FLA, WAS, OAK).
3) I love the Indians and want them to succeed.
4) The Indians need another outfielder.
5) I do not want them to sign Josh Willingham.

Only an Indians fan (or a fan of a team that's truly pitiful -- say, the Royals or Pirates) can understand that this is entirely logical. This would appear to be a huge logical gaffe to a Dodgers fan, a White Sox fan, or a Twins fan. But that's because this is the move of a team that feels they just need to get a little bit better -- a team that can look at their roster and say 'if we can squeeze one more better than average player into the lineup, we're in the playoffs!"

The Indians aren't that team.

Now hold off. I am not issuing a forecast of gloom and doom for the Tribe. I'm excited by 2012 in a way I never would have thought possible in March of last year (or after the first two games of the year, where I thought the Indians had a genuine chance of going 0-162). My forecast is, admittedly, one of profound fatalism and inevitability. But it's one that actually could skew positive. I'm here to tell you that Josh Willingham is essentially irrelevant because the Indians' futures will be controlled by the production from a load of other variables.

In a couple spots, the Indians cannot match the Tigers. They will not have Miguel Cabrera or Justin Verlander in 2012. They will not have players as good as those. Period. The difference between Masterson and Verlander is much more ephemeral than people would ever admit, but there's still a gap there and it doesn't favor the Indians. If Alex Avila's 2011 is for real, you know, despite having a magnificent catcher, we probably aren't going to match that.

But more significantly, the Indians just have a load of question marks that because of a lack of depth will likely determine the Indians' success or failure. Here's how I see the opening day roster right now:
SP - Masterson, Jimenez, Carmona, Lowe, Tomlin - Tomlin is the only one who could fall out for non-injury reasons, and he strikes me as the second coming of Mitch Talbot, but I think he's safe to fend off Huff/Gomez for now.
RP - Perez, C., Perez, R., Smith, Pestano, Hagadone, Sipp. Herrmann - This is an odd bullpen because it'd have 3 left-handers, but I think Hagadone has to stay. Maybe Huff or Gomez makes the team as a long reliever at the expense of Hagadone or Herrmann, but if that's the case, the Indians need to move Hagadone back to being a starter so he can be useful to the club down the road.
C - Santana, Marson - there's a good argument for carrying three catchers so they can use Santana as a full-time 1B, but Marson doesn't hit enough to play him that much.
IF - LaPorta, Kipnis, Cabrera, Chisenhall, Donald, Phelps - there's no other full-time first basemen on the roster or in the organization, so LaPorta is at least in some role with this team until they make a move (like signing Willingham). There's a chance Phelps won't be on the roster, the alternative would likely be Ezequiel Carrera (which, in case you're not as worldly as I am, is Spanish for "Trevor Crowe", because that's the level of non-production you'll get from him) or Jack Hannahan, who is hard to carry on the roster without some demonstrable ability to play 2B.
OF - Brantley, Sizemore, Choo, Duncan - my spanish is rusty, but I believe Ezequiel Carrera is Spanish for Trevor Crowe. He is not a major league player. So there's definitely reason to consider signing an outfielder.
DH - Hafner - I always forget this guy. Poor Travis Hafner. He's probably my second favorite Indians player ever (after Lofton), but he's become such an afterthought.

Let's address these in order of significance.
1) Ubaldo Jimenez - if Ubaldo Jimenez pitches like he did in 2011, the Indians are done. They aren't going anywhere north of second place without a huge pitching season from someone else -- and with Carrasco shelved for 2012, there's not likely to be another # 2 starter. Unless...

2) Fausto Carmona - I know, I know. He's had one great season, one very good season and a whole lot of mediocre or worse seasons. But last year he got stung with some real bad luck -- his ERA was over a run over his xFIP, his FIP was .39 higher than his xFIP -- he should have been decent, but his season was bad. But it also was a season of pockmarks more than anything. He had a couple astonishingly bad starts that really made his season look atrocious. If he could have just gotten the flu before his opening day start, his ERA would have been .40 lower. If he'd simply missed the game on September 6, he'd have dropped his ERA by .31. In other words, as mediocre as Carmona was, two atrocious starts made up .71 of his ERA. He misses those starts, he has a 4.74 ERA and is firmly within the realm of adequacy. The ship has sailed on Carmona being an ace. It's abundantly clear that 2007 is the outlier in his career. But that doesn't keep him from being a # 3 starter. And if Jimenez performs the task he was acquired to perform, that's all Carmona needs to be.

3) Grady Sizemore - Ugh. Here is my prediction for Grady Sizemore in 2011. .000/.000/.000. He'll get injured in spring training and miss 2012. That's my projection. You know why that's my projection? Because if it's not that, then there's simply no discernable projection left. Sizemore in 2012 is basically like Travis Hafner in 2011 -- all we know is that he used to be a fantastic player and that in the years he hasn't been fantastic, he's been significantly injured. That doesn't mean he still is a fantastic player, it doesn't prove that he's finished. It just proves that what's past is past. But Sizemore, despite having no projection left in him, is the most critical hitter because the Indians simply don't have a replacement for pre-2009 Grady Sizemore. Michael Brantley is an adequate CF offensively, but he's not going to provide much in the way of power. Sizemore could do that -- and did during his fantastic debut to the 2011 season. In April, Sizemore was better than he'd ever been. He had never had a month that good. It was only 11 games, certainly, but he'd never had an 11 game stretch that was that productive before. Then he fell off in May back into the realm of sustainability, but spiked again with home runs in back to back games and then...injured. He went on the DL, rushed back, played very poorly for a lengthy stretch, went on the DL until September, came back and played poorly for a while. So what did we learn? Lord if I know. He's not going to do April for an entire season. But he's never been bad when he's actually healthy. Which he most likely will never be. But oh, if he were...

4) Shin-Soo Choo - 2011 was as fantastic a season as you could have hoped for if you wanted people to never notice that Shin-Soo Choo had become one of the best players in baseball. Unfortunately, the reason for this was because he was no longer one of the best players in baseball, he was just a adequate hitter with a great arm. In 2011, he got caught stealing (12/17 success rate = not worth stealing bases), got caught drunk driving (0.20 = not worth driving), and he became a drag on a team that he'd carried out of the realm of awfulness the prior two seasons. A 2010-level Choo wouldn't have won the division for the Indians, but it would have kept it close into September instead of letting Detroit launch to a ridiculous 15 game win on the back of the real difference-maker in the AL (Doug Fister, which we can hope is merely new English for "Doyle Alexander"). And maybe it would have kept the Indians from making desperation moves to try and stay in a race from which they were fading (see #1).

5) Lonnie Chisenhall - As much as Sizemore is the linchpin for the entire offense, Chisenhall is likely second, because he plays a relatively premium offensive position and is one of the most projectable players in the organization. With the Jimenez trade stripping the Indians of their top-end prospects, Chisenhall and Jason Kipnis are what's left. Kipnis acquitted himself admirably in the major leagues and looks ready for the challenge of playing every day -- albeit with a likely regression from his power-drenched 2011 stint. Chisenhall looked like he was Jack Hannahan without the glove. He was impatient, chased everything off the plate, and went from being a hitter who could work counts to a 3-pitch strikeout. He still hit for a solid slugging percentage, but got on base so rarely that he provided an offensive regression from Hannahan (whose numbers for the year reeked of respectable major league status, despite a lengthy history reflecting the contrary). Chisenhall doesn't have to become Adrian Beltre in order for the Indians to succeed. But he does have to become Casey Blake -- a hitter whose average won't ever shine, but who can hit 20+ home runs and get on base.

6) The wasteland at the right corner of the infield - it has been 9 years since the Indians had a first baseman worthy of playing a premium offensive position. 2012 is not about to change this. Shelley "Mr. AAAA" Duncan is currently the most potent option at the first base spot, because Matt LaPorta actually looked worse in 2011 than he ever had before. Yes, LaPorta was hurt, but unless his eyes were injured, that's not much of a comfort. His walks were cut in half in 2011, his power went up, but only to a threshold of mere acceptability (again, we can summon our memories of Casey Blake). Duncan, despite having never warranted substantial playing time in his career, flat out outhit LaPorta. He worked counts, drew walks, hit the same 11 HR LaPorta did, he just did it all in a crazy 7-HR September when it didn't matter because the season was over and the team was in utter freefall. Could Duncan actually hit like he did in 2011 over an entire season? Answer: probably not. He's been productive in the minors, but only at stages where he was too old for his level. He is worthy of a roster spot and is an acceptable player. But he's not going to be what Matt LaPorta was supposed to be -- that long-cherished 30 HR, .500+ SLG first baseman that Jim Thome gave us from '97-02. And that is what a legitimate contender is going to have at first base. Only loaded teams like the Rangers can make do with less.

So there you have it. The Indians have no fewer than 6 major question marks from the 25 spots on the roster -- and 4 every day starters in that lineup. What the team needs is insurance -- Sizemore is not a likely candidate to play 162 games. Brantley is there as an option in CF, but if Sizemore goes on the DL -- someone else will be needed.

Unless things have changed markedly, Willingham is going to prove to be too expensive to be an insurance policy (I have little doubt he'll demand -- and get -- in the range of $8-10 million per year). But he won't offer anywhere near that value to the Indians. He hasn't shown he can play 1B every day -- he has 4 innings there for his career, so he can't be used as an upgrade to the position where the best option is an unknown quantity with a low ceiling.

He's superior offensive LF to Michael Brantley, but his defense eats up those gains (in fact, because of Brantley's defensive ability, baseball-reference puts Brantley at a higher WAR for 2011 - 2.2 to 1.8). So LF isn't likely a marked upgrade.

And so your reason to invest in a Josh Willingham (and the three years at which such a conversation would start) is because you think Michael Brantley will be needed in CF. And if you think Michael Brantley is needed in CF, then you shouldn't have signed Grady Sizemore. And signing a player on the theory that he can spend some time at DH just doesn't make sense when you consider those DHs who can't find demand in the marketplace. Even knowing that David Ortiz can never play in the field, his value over Willingham's is exponential. Talent at DH now strikes me as the most undervalued commodity on the market -- and the amazing collapse of Adam Dunn is likely to only exacerbate this inefficiency. The money would be better spent for a player that offers some offensive production, but also defensive value. In this market, that's Cody Ross -- a player I loathe, but think would make a lot more sense for the Indians because of his ability to play some CF and keep Ezequiel Carrera far away from the major leagues.

Welcome back, FJM!

2011-04-14T12:45:00.001-07:00

So a lot has happened through 12 games, the Indians became media darlings, then immediately dropped two games, and for all their greatness, we're still inhabiting a world where the Red Sox are 2-9 and the Royals are a game back of first place, so it's too early to celebrate a turnaround. But there are at least signs of optimism.

Rather than start a blog called Fire Howard Bryant, I'm going to point out some of the myriad problems with this article. It is only that I feel comfortable that my blog will not generate more than three or four hits on this piece of garbage that I can do so in good conscience. (In true FJM style, his words are in italics, mine are not.)

Barry Bonds, baseball's all-time home run leader and from 2000 to 2004 easily the most dominant player since Babe Ruth, will wake up Thursday as a convicted felon.

Or a cockroach, if Kafka was onto something. Maybe even a porpoise. That'd be totally cool.

A San Franciso [sic] jury convicted him of obstruction of justice.

If only they'd been given rice-a-roni. It was not a San Francisco jury. He was tried in the Northern District of California, so that means there were people in the jury panel from Santa Rosa, Petaluma, Salinas, Oakland, Eureka, San Jose. But, obviously, the jury's potential residence in a large city makes it very different. If this were one of those god-forsaken Petaluma juries, they'd just be off their rocker and Bonds would be an untainted legend of the game.

Roger Clemens, arguably the game's greatest pitcher, faces the possibility of a similar fate.

I think if you argue that Clemens is the game's greatest pitcher, you are arguably an idiot, but fine, he was a great pitcher.

Seven times a Cy Young Award winner, Clemens will go on trial this summer for lying to Congress.

Once, twice, three times a Cy Young winner...uh...this sentence has been brought to you by the Commodores.

And Manny Ramirez, one of the featured faces of the crowning moment of this millennium -- the Boston Red Sox finally winning the World Series in 2004 for the first time since 1918 -- retired from baseball last week rather than accept a 100-game suspension for being caught using performance-enhancing drugs again.

As you know, Manny Ramirez played a large role in the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak, cleaned up the BP oil spill, completed the human genome project or produced those Progressive commercials with Flo in them. One of those has to be the crowning achievement of the millennium, right? Oh. No. I forgot, a team with the second highest payroll in baseball beat the completely surmountable odds (and the team with the 11th highest payroll in baseball) and won the World Series. It's possible that someone's discovered a cure for all cancer in the last 10 years, but compared to the Sawx, it'd hardly be worth mentioning.

Despite fierce but unsuccessful attempts by fans, writers, players and management to soften the devastating and embarrassing effects of the steroid era, baseball's greatest fears are coming true.

Man, were those attempts fierce. These attempts were so vicious, they need not be recounted or described. But they couldn't ward off baseball's greatest fear: clowns. As you may know, baseball, a game, an outline of rules for playing a sport, is terrified of clowns. And by devastating and embarrassing effects of the steroid era, I can only assume he means shrunken testicles.

Wednesday's verdict . . . reinforces baseball's terrible truth: the steroid era is the most discredited period in the history of American professional sports.

Keep in mind, he said "American professional sports", because otherwise the most discredited period in sports would be Caster Menenya's. (rim shot). But, alas, it's very discredited. That's why we don't consider records of that era when we compile lists of records, like, say, all of professional baseball before 1901.

The apologists will continue to try to laugh the era off as hyperbole, suggesting that players have been looking for an edge since there were eight balls in an at-bat and pitchers threw underhand . . . or . . . try to use the nonsensical argument that players who used uppers in the 1960s were no different than the players injecting themselves with female fertility drugs.

The best way to make an argument sound nonsensical is to make a nonsensical argument and accuse other people of making it. Well done. There isn't anything in common with Willie Mays reportedly using amphetamines and Manny Ramirez using female fertility drugs in a supposed attempt to mask his use of performance-enhancing drugs. There is, however, a one-to-one correspondence with Willie Mays reportedly using amphetamines to enhance his ability to recover from exhaustion and boost his performance level (at a time when amphetamines had not been banned in baseball) and Manny Ramirez using performance-enhancing drugs to enhance his performance (at a time when steroids had not been banned in baseball). While Manny managed to test positive after drug testing was implemented and it's more like cheating, you may have forgotten, you're writing about BARRY BONDS, who never tested positive for anything except being a cuddle bear.

Of course, there is a difference. The difference is in the collateral damage, the real collateral damage.

This is a very violent article -- collateral damage? Did Barry Bonds declare war on America? So what's the collateral damage?

Bonds and Miguel Tejada, the two MVPs in 2002, have now both been convicted in PED-related cases.

Oh. That's it? I'd forgotten about Tejada entirely, and Bonds' conviction has had the legacy of about 8 hours, during which you wrote this garbage. So obviously, Bonds has harmed mankind, but only as an accessory before the fact.

Rafael Palmeiro, despite 569 home runs and 3,000 hits, received only 11 percent of the available votes for the Hall of Fame this winter. Mark McGwire hit 70 home runs in 1998 and finished his career with 583, but received less than 20 percent of the votes.

So, collateral damage...bodies. Corpses. Serious harm. We gonna get there? Because I've got work to do. All you've shown me is that hall of fame voters are, depending on your point of view, defending the honor of steroid-free players like Barry Larkin (ok, well, that argument fell apart in a hurry) or they are snotty holier-than-thou pricks who sit in judgment based on facts they don't know (like how much work Jeff Bagwell put in at the weight room). Given that Rickey Henderson only got 94.8% of the vote for the Hall of Fame, that didn't exactly warrant an article.

Jason Giambi, the fun-loving 2000 American League MVP, was never the same player or the same celebrity after he admitted to PED use.

Fun-loving (WTF?) Jason Giambi admitted PED use at the age of 32. You know who else wasn't the same player after they turned 32? Every player. By my quick analysis, three players got better: Jamie Moyer, Raul Ibanez, and Barry Bonds (who, again, was supposed to be the subject of this article). Pretty much everyone else got worse. Ken Griffey Jr. was never the same player after he was traded from the Mariners. Clearly, the collateral damage of being traded from the Mariners destroyed the game. Better retire now, Cliff Lee.

There is not another American sport where so many of the elite have been disgraced.

Unless we're counting superbike racing, there are not very many American sports. And even at that, I don't know. LeBron is a pariah, Kobe's a gay-bashing accused rapist, and that's all the players half the adult population in the US can name in the NBA. The NFL is a sport without a meaningful history, no real pride in the game, and because most of the population that consumes the NFL like ravenous animals still don't know players for long, since the shelf life of even non-Favre/Manning/Brady stars in the NFL is a matter of a few years, Shawne Merriman using steroids meant nothing to anyone. They also have a drug testing program that's about as rigorous as a character and fitness exam for admission to the bar.

Perhaps only the segregation era shamed the game as much as performance-enhancing drugs have. But segregation was a societal issue, and few individual players (even highly publicized racists such as Ty Cobb or Cap Anson) suffered the disintegration of their professional reputations that has come with being associated with steroids.

Andy Pettitte can hardly show his face without ... receiving adulation. Alex Rodriguez gets booed...exactly as much as he did before. You know, maybe people just don't like Barry Bonds. People didn't like Albert Belle.

But the Bonds case, and the Clemens case to follow, are only partly about performance-enhancing drugs. They're also about the belief among players that they could lie to a federal grand jury or to Congress.

Actually, the latter? That's entirely what they're supposed to be about. So the real shame is that the government is complicit in these charades.

Or to you. And the game's general managers, owners and commissioner believed they could do the same, and did until the entire card house came crashing down starting with the famous Congressional hearings on March 17, 2005.

Aside from Manny Ramirez, players already lie to us. Derek Jeter would have you believe he wants to win as much as every fan in the stands. But he doesn't, because Derek Jeter has some sense. Every fan in the stands would say they'd crash into the wall to win the game for their team every day. Bobby Abreu didn't, because he recognized that crashing into a wall might mean he's out of work at the age of 30. In a lot of ways, Manny's the only honest player, because he made it look like he didn't give a shit.

Wednesday's guilty verdict is further evidence that the collapse is ongoing.

No doubt. After that verdict, which probably changed the public opinion about whether Barry Bonds used steroids less than 1%, Barry Bonds will never play Major League Baseball again. TIMBER!

Bud Selig, who became the richest commissioner in baseball history during the steroid era, issued a statement that did not mention Bonds by name, as if he had never played the game, had never impacted its record books, its history, culture or that the game would endure beyond scandal.

I hate Bud Selig. I think he is a genuinely bad person who has done serious harm to the game with some of his ridiculous decisions. But there have been ... what, eight commissioners of baseball? He became the richest of 8 people? Is this inflation-adjusted? I'm pretty sure he was already the richest from day one, but maybe Peter Ueberroth was a member of the Barbary Pirates or something. Anyway, screw you, William Eckert. You're dead AND poorer than Selig.

He then gets paid by the column inch by reproducing a lengthy quote from Selig that lauds baseball's drug testing program.

Contrast Selig's words to those spoken by another commissioner, A. Bartlett Giamatti, on Aug. 24, 1989, about his banishment of Pete Rose for gambling. Giamatti understood that the players also make the game, by their talent, their names and the wonder of their skills. Giamatti mentioned Rose by name, for responsible effect, to show that the game had been wounded by one of its greatest sons, an admission Selig could not make.

"The matter of Mr. Rose is now closed," Giamatti said that day. "It will be debated and discussed. Let no one think that it did not hurt baseball. That hurt will pass, however, as the great glory of the game asserts itself and a resilient institution goes forward. Let it also be clear that no individual is superior to the game."

That's great. Giamatti was talking about things HE did, he wasn't commenting on something that was completely unrelated to himself. In order to explain his decision to ban Rose, he had to say it was harmful to the game -- it's in the Major League Agreement that the Commission could "investigate, either upon complaint or upon his own initiative, an act, transaction or practice, charged, alleged or suspected to be detrimental to the best interest of the national game of baseball, (and to determine and take) any remedial, preventive or punitive action (he deemed appropriate)."

And, for that matter, what else would Giamatti say? It wasn't about a larger issue, it was about one guy gambling. You know how you were saying there was no comparison between the two? Well, you're getting a lot closer to it here, Howard.

When a trial ends, it is supposed to provide closure.

It says so right in Article III of the Constitution. And in the Bill of Rights! As I recall, the Sixth Amendment right to trial by jury concludes by saying "so you can get some sleep at night, for Christ's sake".

The Bonds trial did not, but it did shift the steroid era into its second phase, its deadliest phase for baseball.

"The Deadliest Phase" is currently slated to debut with a 13-week run on the Discovery Channel in summer of 2011. I will anxiously await what Howard Bryant has likened to the horrors of the Japanese earthquakes, Hurricane Katrina...and it's...Manny Ramirez not getting into the Hall of Fame.

It's where the greatest of a generation, the men at the top of the record books, are erased by a game that is just as guilty as its players.

Cursed Jenga -- you're as guilty as those poor souls that you lure into building and destroying the tower. And curse Bud Selig's oily hide. He's the one keeping Barry Bonds out of the Hall of Fame. He let down baseball, he singlehandedly kept Bonds injecting himself, he injected Palmeiro, he singlehandedly cast less than 30% of the votes for the Hall of Fame for Mark McGwire.

It's just a shame there isn't some sort of organization of sportswriters who could vote for the Hall of Fame. Sure, they wrote a ton of stories glorifying McGwire and Sosa in their home run chase (let's be honest, the Bonds thing was pretty underwhelming after that -- the record was already a joke), but they know who really belongs in the Hall of Fame and they didn't let steroids happen on their watch.

Oh. Really? The BBWAA, of which you, Howard Bryant, are apparently a member determines who gets in the hall of fame. Not the god of baseball. Or the fans. Hm. All right, well, then Howard Bryant is an idiot.

Indians to sign Nick Johnson

2011-03-02T07:29:00.001-08:00

The Tribe is reportedly on the verge of signing Nick Johnson. Now here's a deal that makes some sense, even if it's not a world-beater. First, it's a minor league deal, no one's getting shuttled off the roster for Johnson, who may very well be starting the season on the 60-day DL even if he were on the 40-man. Second, there's no sense in pretending there's not a gigantic question mark playing first for the Indians this year. If Johnson can play the field (and setting aside the collision with the Indians' current left fielder, he's not found a way to get hurt doing that), he's a decent reserve option, even if he's more punchless than what you'd like from a first baseman. Even with the dearth of power, though, the guy still churns out great OPS+ numbers because you just can't keep him off first base (career OBP is .401).

Will this work out? Almost certainly not -- he can't swing a bat even though his surgery was in May of last year, he's had back issues, and he was considered a DH-only player when the Yankees signed him last year. But could the Tribe have added a possible DH to spell Hafner and a first baseman who can get on at a .380 clip and maybe rediscover a power stroke for 20 doubles? Yes. And when the only other "first baseman" the Tribe has is catcher Carlos Santana, it doesn't hurt to have Johnson around, because Santana can't be an every day guy when the Indians don't have any catching in the high minors pipeline (or 40-man roster).

The Curse of Chris Antonetti

2011-03-01T12:04:00.000-08:00

Austin Kearns arrested on suspicion of DUI. Well, let's just hope this is the worst offseason Chris Antonetti ever has. Thus far, he's signed a fourth outfielder who got himself arrested, a second baseman who is neither a second baseman nor a marked upgrade over the current slate of misfits and incompetents, and a middle reliever who is okay, but serves no real purpose on a team that's destined to hit 100 losses.

I think Kearns is the best signing (though given our common surname, I probably just like being able to phrase it that way), but this isn't exactly encouraging news.

MLB allows Red Sox a 41-man roster

2011-02-22T08:19:00.000-08:00

Well, try as I might, I just cannot see how this is an acceptable contract under Major League Baseball league rules. Andrew Miller, the once-promising Tigers prospect who flamed out in Florida, has signed a minor league deal with the Red Sox. He could have gotten major league contracts from the Pirates and Indians of the world, but he's with the Red Sox.

That's something baseball can't fix. People will take less to win, just the same as the Heat loaded up on decent veteran players who decided to take 50% or greater pay cuts to play with Wade/James/Bosh.

Miller's contract, on the other hand, is not the same thing. The contract he has with the Red Sox is egregious and unfair to the game. If the Red Sox put him on the major league roster, he gets $1.3 million. Fair enough. If he then gets sent to the minors, because he can no longer be optioned, he would have to be designated for assignment and, therefore, made available to all teams. But in this case, it's different. If he gets DFA'd and someone claims him, he has an option for $3 million that vests for 2012. In other words, the Red Sox have a ready-made 41-man roster, because they can take him off the 40-man at will, so long as no one feels interested in paying $3 million for a player the Red Sox deemed unworthy of playing in the majors.

That MLB allows this kind of provision defeats the entire purpose of being designated for assignment. The 40-man roster is supposed to make it so that teams like the Red Sox will occasionally have to lose off 26th men that might prove to be solid roster pieces -- or even starters -- for lesser clubs. Instead, it will just make the rich richer -- players will sign these poison pill contracts with the teams they don't want to leave -- the Yankees, the Red Sox, the Phillies -- but the Indians? No way. Bud Selig needs to exercise his authority to act in the best interests of baseball and void the contract.

As a side note, this blog will now be mirrored at MLBLogs

Indians sign Orlando Cabrera

2011-02-11T08:40:00.000-08:00

You know those environmental ads from the 1970s that had an Indian (given what this blog covers, I should emphasize that I mean a Native American and not, say, Rico Carty or Rick Manning) seeing a polluted and litter-covered landscape shedding a single tear? (Well, I don't, not really, I was born in 1980.) But, since for some reason I am culturally aware of them, that's pretty much the response I have to the latest Indians signing. It takes such little effort to not litter, to not spew toxic pollution into the sky, and to not sign Orlando Cabrera. And yet people do these things anyway.

Which, whatever, I'm sure there's a reason to sign Orlando Cabrera to a minor league deal, let him come to camp Grudzielanek-style, then release him in May despite the fact that he's playing better than the alternatives (again, Grudzielanek-style) to make room for a worthless player like Luis Valbuena to negative-WAR his way through the season. The move also means that the Indians could move Asdrubal Cabrera back to second base and see if that helps their woeful infield defense or it means that Orlando Cabrera is a candidate to replace Jayson "The Head Lice Eliminator" Nix.

Nope. Wrong (major league deal). Wrong (won't play as well as Grudzielanek, who was an experienced 2B and a career 90 OPS+ player, well better than Cabrera, though Cabrera has a chance to notch an extra-base hit this season -- more than Grudz did in his 30 hits last year). Wrong (AsCab's staying at shortstop). Wrong (reports have Cabrera playing second base). 0-for-4. Well, that looks pretty much identical to what Cabrera's statline will 4 days a week.

So let me be the first to say...Ugh.

A few years ago, Orlando Cabrera is a player that I'd always kind of lumped in with that group of itinerant NL East shortstops -- Alex Gonzalez with the Marlins, Edgar Renteria with the Marlins/Braves, Cabrera with the Expos back in the day. They had different strengths and weaknesses, but they all could produce 10-20 home runs, 10-20 stolen bases and could field. They were at least quintessentially league average players in my mind.

That's changed for a couple of reasons. 1) He's old. Anyone who saw him last year had no doubt in their mind he was not about to hit 10 home runs or steal 20 bases ever again. He was in a phenomenal hitters park in Cincinnati and notched a whopping 4 HR. He hasn't hit 10 home runs since 2004. 2) He may have been good in my mind, but my mind was wrong (and was almost certainly rooted in not picking a shortstop until the 20th round of a 5x5 roto fantasy draft). Orlando Cabrera has been a league average player once. Once in his fourteen year career has he notched an OPS+ of 100 or greater.

So what's the rationale behind this deal?
1) We need to sign some players people have heard of, otherwise no one will come to the games.
How's this hold up? Poor. Well, they signed someone people have heard of. No one's coming to the games to see Orlando Cabrera. Hell, no one came in Cincinnati.

2) We need a motivational leader, he's been to the playoffs a ton.
How's this hold up? Poor. Yep. He's been in the playoffs. A lot lately (2004 w/ BOS, 2005, 2007 w/ LAA; 2008 w/ CHW, 2009 w/ MIN, 2010 w/ CIN). And except for the poor Angels, who gave him a three-year deal, every year that he gets to the playoffs with a team, they send him packing the next year. Oh, and the Indians aren't going to the playoffs in 2011 unless they get transferred to the International League.

3) It's a no-loss move. If he performs, we trade him; if he doesn't, we release him.
How's this hold up? Atrocious. For one, Cabrera would have to have one astonishing season to get anything in return for him. Second (and this is the reason the deal is truly awful), the Indians have 40 guys on their 40 man roster. They've been trading and trading every year, adding guys who then have to be added to the 40 man or lost in the Rule 5 draft. They're stockpiling a world of mediocre prospects, but no real blue chips. The chances of the Indians trading Cabrera for anything but salary relief is insignificant, and what's worse, whatever the Indians potentially lose off their 40-man roster will almost certainly have more value than whatever they could elicit in a trade (it's not like we have Chris Gimenez on there anymore). And, like keeping Grudzielanek (a move I actually liked, given that, because I was convinced Carmona was going to be the third Indians Cy Young winner to get traded, the 2010 Indians looked like they maybe just maybe could be respectable in an awful division), it keeps you from really finding out what you have in someone else. In Grudzielanek's case, it kept Jason Donald in the minors. In Cabrera's case, it'll keep Jason Donald on the bench. Whatever you think of Donald, his upside is at least Orlando Cabrera offensively, and defensively, we don't know what Cabrera can do anywhere but shortstop, and the results at short weren't exactly pretty.

Someone does have to go, though, since this is a major league deal. My vote goes to Shelley Duncan, Vinnie Pestano, or Trevor Crowe, but I can't imagine it'll be Crowe, given the complete uncertainty with Sizemore and Brantley's status as a complete unknown.

4) Indians fans who didn't know who they still liked on the team last April bought Asdrubal Cabrera jerseys because Santana wasn't in the majors yet. Now they'll have to buy new jerseys, because their 13 Cabrera jerseys will be outdated now that he will have to wear 13 A. Cabrera.
How's this hold up? You know, I came up with this, I honestly think this might be the best reasoning on behalf of the signing, except that about 38 people in the U.S. own the jersey of a current Indians player. 35 of those people are currently Indians players. (I'm presuming that the other 5 have already had theirs stolen by Lonnie Chisenhall, given his penchant for non-base thievery.)

5) He's not Nick Punto.
How's this hold up? Great signing. I LOVE Orlando Cabrera.

So I'm guessing this is how things shape up:
SS A. Cabrera
LF Sizemore
C Santana
RF Choo
DH Hafner
1B LaPorta
3B Nix/Donald
2B O. Cabrera
CF Brantley

Kenny Lofton: Hall of Famer?

2011-01-07T13:35:00.000-08:00

A week ago, America's greatest living writer Joe Posnanski (with all apologies to Michael Chabon, despite being nominally a sportswriter, Posnanski covers a lot broader turf), in explaining his Hall of Fame vote for Tim Raines, analyzed the greatest leadoff hitters -- in that they met certain criteria (lineup position was not actually among these). The takeaway from it was that Raines was a clear hall of famer. But that wasn't the end of it. Rather, as a final note, Posnanski added: The other thing about that "great leadoff hitters" list? Yeah, Kenny Lofton was probably a better player than you remembered."

Now Rob Neyer is on the Kenny Lofton bandwagon. Well, maybe, like Posnanski, he doesn't say Lofton is a Hall of Famer, but he certainly implies it's a question worthy of consideration. Neyer states, "I believe Barry Larkin gets in next year. That leaves seven holdovers in 2013 ... who will be joined by Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Curt Schilling, Craig Biggio, Sammy Sosa, Mike Piazza, and the terribly underrated Kenny Lofton."

And I guess I'm just taken aback by it.

I love Kenny Lofton. Love the guy unabashedly. Lest there be any doubt, time for a confession: I am the only person on planet Earth who owns a Kenny Lofton Philadelphia Phillies jersey. And I have no doubt that includes Kenny, who can't possibly keep all of the jerseys he's had. (To explain this: I live within an hour's drive of Philadelphia (for a few more weeks, anyway), I've spent more time at Citizens Bank Park than any other ballpark (except Rosenblatt Stadium) by a factor of at least 10, I'm guessing, so I'm a well-wisher for the Phillies, though it's become hard to even wish them well as they mutate into the Yankees.) Even though I had high hopes for Max Ramirez, bringing back Lofton in 2007 was a highlight of the season. He was my favorite Indians player back in the glory years -- his absence was the reason '97 really felt like a fraud (although the fact that the Indians were also pretty bad that year contributed), and I can see how he could have been a hall of fame player -- but that's if his career had gone differently.

He has an OPS+ of 107. Now, defense certainly could be a factor, he was always an exciting defender to watch (what Dewan would say about Kenny Lofton, I have no clue), dWAR on baseball-reference speaks highly of his defense (+11.9 for his career). But that makes him a slightly above average hitter (by OPS standards) with a good stolen base total and superb defense.

I think the Tim Raines love is confusing people into assuming anyone who was great at stealing bases and has their greatness forgotten because they became a journeyman could be a hall of famer. He had a great peak and all, but so did Eric Davis. And it's not even as if his career numbers are dragged down because he went through years where he should have hung it up -- he was just within a hair of average every year from 2000 until the end.

Maybe if we had a magic wand that factors out the 70 home run seasons, then Lofton's numbers start to look much more hall of fame worthy. There's not a hint of any sort of issues with Lofton. He was always a world-class athlete and seemed to be a great guy. But as much as I want to I'm not seeing how he fits in the Hall of Fame, unless he's the sabermetric guys' paean to the era of the stolen base.

Now if you adopt the whole belief that getting on base is the only part of the story, okay, there's a chance. He had a very good OBP -- .372. But even if you use that as the lone criteria, it's not terribly helpful for him.

Even accounting for the theory/fact/myth (you choose) that walks were largely disfavored in the 1970s, he doesn't fare all that well. Of players with more than 8,000 plate appearances -- Lofton's OBP ranks 37th. Yes, that's behind already Hall of Famers like Rickey Henderson (.401), Rod Carew (.400), Joe Morgan (.394) and Mike Schmidt (.380) and it's behind surefire Hall of Fame-caliber players (note how we can no longer declare anyone with biceps a surefire Hall of Famer) like Barry Bonds (.444), Frank Thomas (.419), and (grumble) Derek Jeter (.385). But it's also behind people who are either questionable to get in, like Edgar Martinez (who had an OBP of .418 and ranks fourth on the list -- talk about being underappreciated in his time) or John Olerud (.398).

And it's also behind a number who have already missed, like Keith Hernandez (.384)(who I believe is still the consensus best defensive first baseman of all-time and whose dWAR exceeds Lofton's), Will Clark (.384), and Willie Randolph (.373).

Admittedly, most of those players are first basemen -- there's obviously a different criteria for such players. But it's the ones who are closest to Lofton that make it the hardest. Brett Butler (0.4%), Willie Randolph (1.1%), Ken Singleton (0%), and Tony Phillips (0.2%) all finish above him on this list. Even if they were all added together, they wouldn't have lasted to a second ballot.

Those players can be distinguished -- Butler was apparently a lousy defensive center fielder and had marginal success with stealing bases (though the SB total is close), Phillips was never more than a utility player, Randolph didn't steal nearly as many bases as you'd think (only 271 for his career), and Singleton...well, Singleton stole 21 bases in his career. But I don't know how much can really be said to put Lofton on the pedestal of serious Hall of Fame consideration.

You can't spell punto without punt.

2010-12-04T06:13:00.001-08:00

Ugh. Please let the mutual interest be in stamp collecting.

Signing Nick Punto would solve one problem, it would solve the problem of who in the Indians infield can field. It would create some problems in that he's a worse hitter than you would ever want to have in your lineup. Here was my response when the Twins mistakenly gave him 2 years and $8 million. And he was more useful then. Really, he's adequate at shortstop and respectable at third base. But to call his hitting anemic is an insult to people who have anemia. Fangraphs' WAR looks on him favorably, giving him over 1 WAR each of the last three years. Baseball-reference...well, let's just say they disagree. And looking at b-r's oWAR numbers, I don't know how on earth they figured them. I don't know how a .228/.337/.271 season adds up to .8 wins contributed. Maybe it's the 16 steals?

I know there's not much on the third base/utility infield market aside from the dreaded Craig Counsell, but I'd rather have stuck with Andy Marte at third base than spend actual American currency to acquire Nick Punto, whose bat and glove fall short of the legendary Indians relief pitcher. Punto's only add is versatility, being able to not hit at three different spots on the infield. For that, the Indians would be better off waiting until February and picking the best of what's left. Punto will still be out there, unless Dayton Moore gets to him first. Willie Bloomquist and Jerry Hairston Jr. might be as well. You don't go utility infielder bargain shopping in early December unless you are Ruben Amaro, Jr. And that leads to things like giving Juan Castro money to play baseball.

Indians Outlook for 2011

2010-12-02T18:59:00.000-08:00

The Indians' offseason really kicks off today. For all the buzz surrounding the key signing of Luke Carlin, it won't compare to the Indians signing players who aren't intended solely to wear a jersey number greater than 60 in spring training. Today may add a number of players to the Indians' shopping list, since it's the non-tender deadline -- an opportunity to buy players who other clubs are giving up early on or that they simply don't believe are worth the contracts that they'd have to be tendered.

Alas, only players fitting into the former category are likely to wash ashore in Cleveland. Players like Hideki Okajima and Matt Diaz are likely to get some form of actual money somewhere, they will just do so as free agents.

Thus far, the deadline has been relatively quiet -- Bobby Jenks is far and away the biggest name non-tendered, and it's a certainty he'll find work somewhere other than Ontario and Carnegie.

A number of the players who have already been non-tendered are former Indians themselves.

Ryan Church was, alas, one of the best draft picks the Indians have to show for the 2000s (14th round in 2000) and showed serious promise when he finally got a chance with the Nationals and Mets (after being traded for Scott Stewart), but concussions have stripped him of any and all usefulness. He's a reclamation project, and even among those, there are a lot better options.

Joe Inglett was non-tendered by the Brewers -- he too got his start in the Indians organization (8th round in 2000), but was waived after a season as a utility player. He is also very unlikely to be interesting to the Indians, his versatility is mostly limited to second base and the corner outfield spots.

Jose Veras was a very short-term Indian in 2008 when Mark Shapiro was trying everything with an arm in the imploding bullpen. He pitched 22 games for the Tribe after being purchased from the Yankees. The best thing that can be said for him is that his #2 comparable player on baseball-reference is Randy St. Claire, so perhaps Veras will have a stint as a pitching coach for a lousy major league team someday.

Of the players already non-tendered, the ones who would be most likely to fit with the Tribe are Edwin Encarnacion, Jose Lopez, and Matt Diaz. The Indians aren't likely to sign any of them, mind you, but Encarnacion is at least nominally a third baseman. That alone makes him worth considering, given that the would-be incumbent (Jayson Nix) isn't overwhelming.

Alas, Encarnacion has two big drawbacks. One is that he is likely to make more than a couple million in whatever deal he signs. He's a non-tender because his contract would call for him to make more than $4 million right now. Even assuming his price comes down, it'd still be at a level where he'd likely be too large a chunk of the Indians' meager payroll to justify. This is especially so since his second drawback is one that's all too familiar to Indians fans already -- defensive ineptitude. Unlike Nix, Encarnacion has only ever played third base in the majors, but that's not to say he plays it much better. If you have any doubts, type in "edwin encarnacion ghastly" into google. An impressive percentage of those hits are discussing his propensity for making key fielding and throwing errors. In general, his range is acceptable to good, but his throwing is atrocious. Given that although the Tribe's first baseman hit like the second coming of Ben Broussard, he didn't field like him, Encarnacion is a fit in name only. He'd make more sense with a big budget club like Philadelphia as an occasional starter in a corner infield spot.

Jose Lopez is better defensively (at least last year at third base), but comes with the cost of being incapable of drawing a walk or getting on base -- notching an unheard of career OBP under .300. I can't imagine he's the best option for any team, though if he could adapt to being a pinch hitter, his impatience would be a lot more excusable.

Diaz would make a lot of sense for the Indians, but I don't think they are acknowledging a need for a corner outfielder yet. I don't know why the Braves are so unsatisfied with Diaz after one bad season, but he's produced well in extended playing time. I'd like to see him come in and fill the Austin Kearns/Shelley Duncan role for the Indians, but I expect he'll go someplace to play as a platoon outfielder for a contender or just remain in Atlanta.

God Bless You, Seattle's Finest (not the coffee place in Borders)

2009-08-11T05:25:00.000-07:00

Seattle traffic officer cites Chicago White Sox GM for jaywalking.

38% of everything is right with the world. An all-time high!

My favorite is the ridiculous slant that Whitesox.com put on the article. Jaywalking is rarely ticketed in big cities, which Williams tried to explain to the officer. Stupid police officer, not understanding what Williams was so kind to attempt to explain to him. Doesn't he know anything about what violations of the law he's obligated to ignore because they don't enforce them in most cities? I'm pretty sure that the Chicago police have exclusive authority to enforce Kenny Williams' inability to read a don't walk sign, and fear we may have another beer summit coming up.

The Age of Incredulity, anyone?

2009-08-10T18:44:00.000-07:00

There's really a tale of two cities in the AL Central. Cleveland, the team that's stocking all the teams fading in the playoff races in the AL and NL because they apparently can't afford to pay Ben Francisco (more on that righteous indignation later), and Chicago, where they're taking on salary left and right to make a run to...lord knows what. The latter city is now going to be known as the place where once-five-tool outfielders go to die -- very wealthily. Not content with just three horsemen of the RF apocalypse in the forms of Milton Bradley, Kosuke Fukudome, and Jermaine Dye, Kenny Williams has acquired Alex Rios from the Toronto Blue Jays for a song.

The song? Squeeze's immortal classic "Take Me, I'm Yours." (Not nearly as good as "Pulling Mussels (from the Shell)")

So the consensus around baseball is that Kenny Williams is an idiot. I'm inclined to agree because he continues to employ Ozzie Guillen, but as questionable as this deal is, I really have a hard time seeing it completely blow up on the White Sox.

Oh, the contract's not good, that much is obvious. In 2010, Rios will make $9.7 million. In 2011, that number's $12 million. In 2012, $12 million more. In 2013, why not, $12.5 million. In 2014, $12.5 million more. And in 2015, the White Sox now hold a critical team option (whew, that makes it all better) for $13.5 million. But is the contract really that bad? I don't think so. The contract info comes from Cot's Baseball Contracts, one of the three or four most useful baseball sites I know of, and I cannot commend it enough.

1) Rios' numbers were down last year, and haven't improved much this year, with his OPS+ actually falling below 100. I'll grant you that's a bad sign, especially following up last year's disappointing year (where Rios posted a 111 OPS+). Of course, if you, like me, are the only person in the world who applies MOPS (add SB to total bases, subtract CS), then you factor in the speed as well, which puts Rios at a .780 MOPS. Not great, but not far off from the kind of player for whom you expect to pay money.

2) The primary decay factor on Rios appears to be his speed. This isn't a good sign for a guy who's 28 years old. But if you look at his numbers from 2008 to 2009, the falloff is in BABIP (.335 in 2008 to .294 in 2009). Moreover, since his peak year in 2007, when he grounded into only 9 double plays, he hit into 20 last year and has already mustered 14 this year. And the decay in slugging isn't in home runs (where he's on pace to hit several more than he did last year), it's in doubles, where he notched 47 last year but is on pace for only 37 this year.

3) Rios' BABIP this year is .294, after he'd posted numbers circling around .330 for his career. .294 is a low figure for a player with any sort of power or any sort of speed, I would expect it to come up. BABIP's not a vastly-reliable number for position players, but it means something.

4) Though his speed's falling off, he's a dead even 0 on UZR, meaning he's a league average right fielder. His arm in right field has either waned or baserunners have simply learned their lesson, because after posting more than 10 OF assists in 3 of the last 5 years, he's only mustered 4 this year. So, he's a considerable upgrade in RF from Jermaine Dye, but not much else. However, his career UZR is +14, meaning that he's saved his team an average of 14 runs each year he's been in the big leagues. That's...phenomenal.

5) Here's the biggest concern I would have if I'm a White Sox fan looking at his 2009 numbers. His numbers on the road are atrocious. In every category. You take this guy out of the Rogers Centre and he's a .237/.278/.339 hitter. What's more, he can't run (though some of this is attributable to him getting on that much less -- 14 steals at home (1 caught stealing), 5 on the road (2 caught stealing).

And here's where I tell you all this is bullshit and I think Kenny Williams is going to end up with at least a non-disgraceful acquisition out of this. The home-road splits are a 2009-only phenomenon. Although I'd normally suspect that a guy who makes his game based on speed is just flying because of the turf in the dome, but his past home-road splits are pretty even. But now you're getting him off the turf, which is admittedly now FieldTurf, but is still not going to be as kind on his legs as natural grass. FieldTurf leads to a lot of muscle pulls and strains -- exactly the sorts of injuries that reduce Rios to a remarkably mediocre player.

Rios is an insurance policy, because the White Sox have just about no one in the minors worth owning, particularly in the outfield. They have no high-level outfield prospects, they have Jermaine Dye in the last year of his own prohibitively expensive contract, and they have been playing Brent Lillibridge and Scott Podsednik in center field. Rios solves at least one of those problems, because now they have a long-term investment, but also have cost certainty. Considering that the economy is showing signs of modest recovery and that baseball has always outstripped the economy in cost growth, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Rios' contract looks pretty commensurate with his production in a year or two. Keep in mind that Alex Rodriguez is currently making $30+ million and Manny and Teixeira are making $20+ million dollars. I'd give Rios a much better chance of living up to his contract value than, say, Ryan Howard.

And, barring economic growth leading to Rios becoming an adequate deal, he should put up a little better power numbers in U.S. Cellular. Though the two are roughly equivalent in park factors for 2009, U.S. Cellular is consistently among the top five home run generating parks in baseball -- the SkyDome is 8th this year, but has varied by about ten spots from that spot. Fangraphs had a similar analysis, though I'd hesitate to go as far as they will, because the Rogers Centre is usually in the top 10, last year appears to be a one-off.

Also consider that the White Sox might not have had much in the way of alternatives in 2010. The top free agent corner outfielders? Jason Bay, Matt Holliday, Bobby Abreu, Jermaine Dye, Andruw Jones, and Johnny Damon. Bay and Holliday will cost far more than the $9.7 million Rios would draw -- and the other four are both old and defensively deficient. The only other outfielder on the free agent list for 2010 that might spark any interest is Rick Ankiel, and Scott Boras would probably expect to be paid about $9.7 million for his lousy production. Trading for an outfielder isn't an option, because as I pointed out, this system is bare. They have Dayan Viciedo, they have Tyler Flowers, ...and then they have little else. They traded most of their pitchers for Peavy, they traded Brandon Allen for Tony Pena...and their other prospects are a couple years away (Jordan Danks) or underachieving (John Shelby Jr.).

So could this deal be a terrible one? Sure. If Rios learns to enjoy Chicago deep dish pizza and loses a step, they're overpaying out the nose for a mediocre corner outfielder. But in the meantime, it gets them a player who might benefit from life away from FieldTurf, can hit both left and right handed pitching, and can fill any number of holes in a porous system.

And it's a great move because I'm an Indians fan who would be forced to admit that hates the White Sox more than anything on this earth when it really comes down to it. That pessimism seals the deal. Great move for Kenny Williams.

Chief Wahoo's Trail of Tears -- a Cleveland Indians blog

2009-08-03T18:41:00.000-07:00

For all the fans that the Cleveland Indians have, and there are a great many, so long as you only conduct your fan census more than 30 miles from the intersection of Carnegie and Ontario, there's not much in the way of Indians blogs out there. Given that all the Indians have for several years is rampant speculation, now seemed like a uniquely suitable time to put my unwarranted speculation, moaning, and Eric Wedge-criticizing into one convenient location.

The Indians are now down, by last count, six players -- three of whom should have been dealt (Betancourt, Garko, and DeRosa -- in that order), three of whom absolutely should not have been dealt (Martinez, Francisco and Lee -- in that order, for reasons I'll cover later). Somehow, however, the Indians still have the two players that everyone knows they needed to trade -- Jamey Carroll and Carl Pavano. Pavano just threw 8 innings of one-run ball, so perhaps his trade value will have increased slightly, but I won't hold my breath. Jamey Carroll just needed to be traded because he's on his way out anyway and he's cheap enough that borderline contenders can just claim him on waivers and barely care if they get stuck with him.

And, because they've now dumped all those players, they are up one Eric Wedge, who has gained an additional year of immunity for incompetence, because the Indians would never fire a manager because he's incapable of competing with inferior talent. Well, the post-Mark Shapiro-firing-Charlie Manuel-for-exactly-that-reason-Indians wouldn't, anyway. Not that it did John McNamara, Pat Corrales, Doc Edwards, Frank Robinson -- that's where I ran out of names, but there are a great many -- basically everyone after Lou Boudreau.

So things are looking grim, not even Harry Doyle can turn this season around -- though the Indians ability to regress to the mean just may. See you at the 12th pick of next year's draft, ladies and gentlemen.