Despite only making the playoffs one time in my previous eight seasons participating in fantasy football, I've decided to try again this year. Just like last season, I will be playing in a "free" league on NFL.com that an old high school buddy runs.
I don't know why I've never been successful in fantasy football. I've always had a love for the sport of football and possess a great deal of knowledge about it, but just like those real football players who possess great skill but lack dedication, maybe I have never quite taken fantasy seriously enough. I don't necessarily sit around and research the fourth-string running back on team X. It hardly ever occurs to me to snatch-up the back-up tight end from team Z in the hopes that the starter gets hurt, and I can swoop-in with my guy and collect those points. I don't spend weeks preparing for the draft.
The draft in my new league is automated, and it's happening on September 4th. I haven't even looked at the rankings. Should I adjust them? Maybe I'll leave them be. What can it hurt? What's going to happen? I'm going to miss the playoffs again? I'm immuned to that.
This attitude is probably why I'm no longer in any "pay" leagues. Like those NFL players with unfullilled promise, I'm in the fantasy football version of the UFL. I'm playing in a league with an automated draft against people I don't even know.
When it comes to fantasy football, I guess my priorities have always been out of alignment. I worry about the wrong things, like talking trash to the other teams in the "comments" section, and of course, picking my team name.
Like an NFL receiver who can't leave the locker room unless his uniform looks pristine, for me, my team name has always been the most important thing to me.
I thought I had some good ones in season's past, but this season? Man, I think I have the best one in the history of the industry:
Horrible Losses.
You've heard of the movie, Horrible Bosses, haven't you? Well, I went to see that movie with my girlfriend earlier this summer, and while sitting in the theater enjoying the film, the name for my 2011 fantasy team hit me like a James Harrison tackle. I knew I had to be in some league just so I could unveil the name Horrible Losses to the world.
My team names from the past--The Bubby Bristers, The Edmund Nelsons, Juiced-up All-pros, Tenacious T, Tony Desire (my heel name if I'm ever a wrestler), and TJ And The Bear--you guys served me well in the past, but I think I've found my true team name this season.
Yes sir. I'll probably miss the playoffs this season (what else is new?), but I'm already declaring myself FANTASY FOOTBALL TEAM NAME CHAMPION!
ALL HAIL HORRIBLE LOSSES!!!!!!!!
Saturday, September 10, 2011
Friday, September 9, 2011
Wednesday night was a rare fun evening at PNC Park for Yours Truly
I haven't had much luck going to Pirates games lately. The last time I truly enjoyed myself at the old ballpark was way back in September of '07 when I took in a game with my uncle. He won the seats at work, and they were right behind home plate. The food was free, and the Pirates beat-up on the Milwaukee Brewers; it doesn't get much better than that.
I didn't go to any games in 2008 because I made a promise to myself not to go to any more baseball games until MLB corrected the economics of their sport.
I had started dating my current girlfriend before the start of the '09 season and my self-imposed ban at MLB games only lasted that one season. When you have a girlfriend, she expects you to do stuff, and that even includes attending Pirates games.
I don't know if breaking my promise caused me bad karma or what, but I just couldn't have a good time at Pirates games with my girlfriend.
Our first game was "Buck Night" in April of '09. Ross Ohlendorf was pitching, and I came up with a clever "Dorf on Pitching" Tim Conway rip-off slogan for the occasion. I didn't make a sign or anything, but I did keep yelling it out. Dorf didn't pitch that well, it started to rain midway through, and we left by the 5th inning.
About a month later, my girlfriend surprised me by taking me to the park for my birthday. The Pirates managed to win this game, but it rained so much that we left well-before it was over.
Last season, we attended maybe the most boring game of the season on a Monday night in early August against the Reds. My memory is a bit fuzzy, but I'm pretty sure they only had one hit and were shut out by Cincinnati. On the way home from the game, I wound up in a lane I wasn't supposed to be in and somehow managed to find myself in the Rivers casino indoor parking garage (I wasn't drinking, by the way). I was pretty angry by the time we got home.
Needless to say, it was the only game we attended in 2010; pretty fitting for a 57-105 season.
Being an optimist, I decided to purchase tickets for the 2011 home-opener. Ah yes, the home-opener. A sure sign of spring. Hope was in the air. The Pirates lost, 7-1. On the way home, I was so angry about the traffic-jam I was in, I started pounding on my own car-door. I'm pretty sure I scared the crap out of my girlfriend.
At the end of May, I went to a Wednesday afternoon game with my girlfriend and my brother. The Pirates were playing the Braves, and even though they got off to their usual "Tony Defeo must be attending this game with his girlfriend" horrible start, the Pirates rebounded to tie the game and had the winning run on 3rd base in the bottom of the 9th inning. Steve Pearce was up--I believe the Braves intentionally walked the bases full in-order to get to Pearce--and I was feeling pretty good about the situation. My brother and I were standing up, waiting to raise the Jolly Roger. But just as we were about to raise it, Pearce grounded into a double-play, and the Braves went on to win, 4-2, in 11 innings. So in 29-innings dating back to '10, my girlfriend and I had witnessed the Pittsburgh Pirates score a grand-total of three runs.
On the way out of the stadium, the vocal Braves fans were annoying me, and on the drive home, traffic kicked my ass again. It was at that time that I vowed never to go to another game again.
But I still had a girlfriend and knew that I would break my promise, once again. Well, that time came this past Wednesday night. I was expecting the worst. I thought we were cursed.
I figured we would have a hard time finding a parking spot, but we found one just a few blocks away.
I figured we'd be late because my girlfriend was running behind, but we got to our seats in section 316 before the first pitch was thrown.
I figured the view wouldn't be great in section 316 and that we'd be cramped in our seats like the home-opener, but the view is great in section 316 ($16 tickets), and since football season has officially arrived, the park was pretty empty.
I figured the concession-lines would still be crowded, but they weren't and we walked right up and bought our hot dogs and popcorn with ease (you have to buy food when you go with your girlfriend. It's like the law or something).
I figured the game would suck after the Pirates fell-behind, 3-0, to the Astros in the top of the first inning thanks to back-to-back home runs, but Andrew Mccutchen answered with a home run of his own in the bottom of the first inning to make it 3-1.
I figured the Pirates would get blown-out when the Astros hit another homer to make it 4-1, but after a long-talk between the Astros pitcher and pitching coach in the bottom of the 5th inning (probably one of those "be careful with this guy" meetings)Andrew hit the first pitch he saw right down the left-field line for a three-run shot to make it 4-4.
I was kind of figuring (hoping) Cutch would hit his third home run later in the game and repeat what he did in 2009 against the Washington Nationals (right after that home run, I jumped off my couch because I couldn't beleive it, and when I sat back down, my girlfriend tickled me and I accidentally kneed her in the head and she hated me), but Cutch would not repeat his '09 performance on this night, even if my girlfriend did tickle me again (this time I was in-control of my reflexes and didn't knee her in the head).
I figured it was just a matter of time before the Pirates gave this game away, but I was pleasantly surprised when Jason Jaromillo drove in the go-ahead run in the bottom of the 8th-inning, even if he did get caught in a run-down that eventually resulted in a double-play when both he and Doumit were tagged out (I certainly wasn't surprise when two-Pirates catchers managed to get caught in a run-down at the same time).
I figured Joel Hanrahan would make me sweat-out the top of the 9th-inning, but jumped up and down when he sent the Astros home, 1-2-3.
All-in-all, one of the most pleasant nights out at the ballpark in many years, and I'm really glad I didn't go tonight.
I didn't go to any games in 2008 because I made a promise to myself not to go to any more baseball games until MLB corrected the economics of their sport.
I had started dating my current girlfriend before the start of the '09 season and my self-imposed ban at MLB games only lasted that one season. When you have a girlfriend, she expects you to do stuff, and that even includes attending Pirates games.
I don't know if breaking my promise caused me bad karma or what, but I just couldn't have a good time at Pirates games with my girlfriend.
Our first game was "Buck Night" in April of '09. Ross Ohlendorf was pitching, and I came up with a clever "Dorf on Pitching" Tim Conway rip-off slogan for the occasion. I didn't make a sign or anything, but I did keep yelling it out. Dorf didn't pitch that well, it started to rain midway through, and we left by the 5th inning.
About a month later, my girlfriend surprised me by taking me to the park for my birthday. The Pirates managed to win this game, but it rained so much that we left well-before it was over.
Last season, we attended maybe the most boring game of the season on a Monday night in early August against the Reds. My memory is a bit fuzzy, but I'm pretty sure they only had one hit and were shut out by Cincinnati. On the way home from the game, I wound up in a lane I wasn't supposed to be in and somehow managed to find myself in the Rivers casino indoor parking garage (I wasn't drinking, by the way). I was pretty angry by the time we got home.
Needless to say, it was the only game we attended in 2010; pretty fitting for a 57-105 season.
Being an optimist, I decided to purchase tickets for the 2011 home-opener. Ah yes, the home-opener. A sure sign of spring. Hope was in the air. The Pirates lost, 7-1. On the way home, I was so angry about the traffic-jam I was in, I started pounding on my own car-door. I'm pretty sure I scared the crap out of my girlfriend.
At the end of May, I went to a Wednesday afternoon game with my girlfriend and my brother. The Pirates were playing the Braves, and even though they got off to their usual "Tony Defeo must be attending this game with his girlfriend" horrible start, the Pirates rebounded to tie the game and had the winning run on 3rd base in the bottom of the 9th inning. Steve Pearce was up--I believe the Braves intentionally walked the bases full in-order to get to Pearce--and I was feeling pretty good about the situation. My brother and I were standing up, waiting to raise the Jolly Roger. But just as we were about to raise it, Pearce grounded into a double-play, and the Braves went on to win, 4-2, in 11 innings. So in 29-innings dating back to '10, my girlfriend and I had witnessed the Pittsburgh Pirates score a grand-total of three runs.
On the way out of the stadium, the vocal Braves fans were annoying me, and on the drive home, traffic kicked my ass again. It was at that time that I vowed never to go to another game again.
But I still had a girlfriend and knew that I would break my promise, once again. Well, that time came this past Wednesday night. I was expecting the worst. I thought we were cursed.
I figured we would have a hard time finding a parking spot, but we found one just a few blocks away.
I figured we'd be late because my girlfriend was running behind, but we got to our seats in section 316 before the first pitch was thrown.
I figured the view wouldn't be great in section 316 and that we'd be cramped in our seats like the home-opener, but the view is great in section 316 ($16 tickets), and since football season has officially arrived, the park was pretty empty.
I figured the concession-lines would still be crowded, but they weren't and we walked right up and bought our hot dogs and popcorn with ease (you have to buy food when you go with your girlfriend. It's like the law or something).
I figured the game would suck after the Pirates fell-behind, 3-0, to the Astros in the top of the first inning thanks to back-to-back home runs, but Andrew Mccutchen answered with a home run of his own in the bottom of the first inning to make it 3-1.
I figured the Pirates would get blown-out when the Astros hit another homer to make it 4-1, but after a long-talk between the Astros pitcher and pitching coach in the bottom of the 5th inning (probably one of those "be careful with this guy" meetings)Andrew hit the first pitch he saw right down the left-field line for a three-run shot to make it 4-4.
I was kind of figuring (hoping) Cutch would hit his third home run later in the game and repeat what he did in 2009 against the Washington Nationals (right after that home run, I jumped off my couch because I couldn't beleive it, and when I sat back down, my girlfriend tickled me and I accidentally kneed her in the head and she hated me), but Cutch would not repeat his '09 performance on this night, even if my girlfriend did tickle me again (this time I was in-control of my reflexes and didn't knee her in the head).
I figured it was just a matter of time before the Pirates gave this game away, but I was pleasantly surprised when Jason Jaromillo drove in the go-ahead run in the bottom of the 8th-inning, even if he did get caught in a run-down that eventually resulted in a double-play when both he and Doumit were tagged out (I certainly wasn't surprise when two-Pirates catchers managed to get caught in a run-down at the same time).
I figured Joel Hanrahan would make me sweat-out the top of the 9th-inning, but jumped up and down when he sent the Astros home, 1-2-3.
All-in-all, one of the most pleasant nights out at the ballpark in many years, and I'm really glad I didn't go tonight.
Thursday, September 8, 2011
Maybe Sidney Crosby's health-scare will force the NHL to join the 21st century, but don't count on it
Penguins superstar center Sidney Crosby had a news conference on Wednesday regarding his recent bout with concussions and, hopefully, put to rest most of the rumors that he was never going to play again. When will Sid return? That's still very much up-in-the-air, but everyone at the press conference--including Sid's doctor--seemed to believe that Crosby is at about 90%. I don't know how one can put a percentage on concussion-recovery, but that's why I'm not a doctor.
If I were the Penguins, I would allow Crosby to take as much time as he needs. I know fans are chomping at the bit for Crosby to return, but he's such an important piece to their entire franchise. Why risk, perhaps, permanent damage by coming back too soon?
Besides, the Pittsburgh Penguins have the luxury of using Evgeni Malkin in Crosby's place while he recuperates. If Crosby is the top player in all of hockey, Geno isn't too far behind, at least in-terms of pure-talent.
The Penguins suffered a double-whammy last season when both Crosby and Malkin were lost for the season with injuries. By all indications, Malkin's knee injury is fully-healed, and if he can regain the form he had a couple of seasons ago, the Penguins should be able to not only stay-afloat in Crosby's absence, but thrive. With the keys in Malkin's hands, the Penguins will still have a pretty talented driver at the wheel to start the 2011/2012NHL season.
Now onto the matter of cheap-shots in the league. Another item tossed around at Sid's press conference yesterday was what the NHL should do about shots to the head. Crosby came out against head shots, basically saying the sport of hockey could function just fine without them.
I agree with him 100%.
I don't understand why it's even an issue. There just is no need to intentionally deliver a blow to someone's head in the sport of hockey.
I've said this before, but it's worth repeating: A number of years ago, I was watching the show Sports Science, and on this particular episode, they were examining which sports had the most impactful hits. Naturally, a football tackle ranked pretty high, but surprisingly, a legal check in hockey didn't register that high on the radar.
In other words, a clean hockey check shouldn't do that much damage. Yeah, sure, it would hurt, but I doubt it would cause very many concussions.
A clean tackle in football, on the other hand, still may cause a concussion simply because of the force alone.
This tells me that it's mainly cheap shots that cause injuries in the sport of hockey. If that's the case, like I said, I don't see where banning them should even be an issue.
However, I doubt this will ever happen because of the "old guard" in the NHL. And when I say "old guard" I'm talking about that Canadian mentality that accepts this kind of garbage.
This is the sort of mentality that thinks it's okay for the sport to employ talentless players who offer nothing of value other than the ability to cheap shot the opponent, and of course, pick fights. The NHL may call these guys "enforcers", but they're really nothing but "goons", plain and simple.
And speaking of fighting, how can the sport of hockey even begin to think about banning head-shots if they're going to continue to allow fighting?
The "old guard" will tell you that a good old-fashioned fight is necessary once in a while. Really? Why?
The old-school hockey fans will tell you that fighting is a deterrent. If it is, please tell me what it's a deterrent too? If it's a deterrent to cheap-shots, why wouldn't a zero tolerance policy on cheap shots be an even better deterrent?
Face it, the NHL doesn't want to eliminate the cheap shots and the fighting because they want their sport to remain "pure." This kind of "purity" is what's stopping the sport from becoming more popular with the casual fan.
If you asked a truly die hard hockey fan, they would tell you that it's perfectly alright with them if casual fans just stayed away from their beloved sport. Yet, these are the same people that get defensive anytime you bring up WAY more popular sports like football and basketball.
Just try talking about the Steelers in a room full of diehard Penguins fans. They'll probably tell you to go to HEdoublehockeysticks.
Well, you can't have it both way, hockey fans. You can't complain when other sports get more attention than yours does if you insist that fighting and cheap shots remain a part of the game.
The NHL is the only league that really doesn't try to protect it's top stars. I mean, think about it. Can you imagine the backlash in the NFL if Tom Brady or Peyton Manning was injured and unable to play because of a cheap-shot by some talentless thug?
When Terrell Owens was injured years ago after a horse-collar tackle, the league outlawed that kind of tackling. When Tom Brady was lost for the year in week one of the 2008 season with a knee-injury, the NFL banned diving at a quarterback's knees.
It appears that the NHL has dodged a bullet with Crosby's concussion, but all it could take is another shot to the head to end his career for good.
Do you think the "old guard" would even notice or care?
If I were the Penguins, I would allow Crosby to take as much time as he needs. I know fans are chomping at the bit for Crosby to return, but he's such an important piece to their entire franchise. Why risk, perhaps, permanent damage by coming back too soon?
Besides, the Pittsburgh Penguins have the luxury of using Evgeni Malkin in Crosby's place while he recuperates. If Crosby is the top player in all of hockey, Geno isn't too far behind, at least in-terms of pure-talent.
The Penguins suffered a double-whammy last season when both Crosby and Malkin were lost for the season with injuries. By all indications, Malkin's knee injury is fully-healed, and if he can regain the form he had a couple of seasons ago, the Penguins should be able to not only stay-afloat in Crosby's absence, but thrive. With the keys in Malkin's hands, the Penguins will still have a pretty talented driver at the wheel to start the 2011/2012NHL season.
Now onto the matter of cheap-shots in the league. Another item tossed around at Sid's press conference yesterday was what the NHL should do about shots to the head. Crosby came out against head shots, basically saying the sport of hockey could function just fine without them.
I agree with him 100%.
I don't understand why it's even an issue. There just is no need to intentionally deliver a blow to someone's head in the sport of hockey.
I've said this before, but it's worth repeating: A number of years ago, I was watching the show Sports Science, and on this particular episode, they were examining which sports had the most impactful hits. Naturally, a football tackle ranked pretty high, but surprisingly, a legal check in hockey didn't register that high on the radar.
In other words, a clean hockey check shouldn't do that much damage. Yeah, sure, it would hurt, but I doubt it would cause very many concussions.
A clean tackle in football, on the other hand, still may cause a concussion simply because of the force alone.
This tells me that it's mainly cheap shots that cause injuries in the sport of hockey. If that's the case, like I said, I don't see where banning them should even be an issue.
However, I doubt this will ever happen because of the "old guard" in the NHL. And when I say "old guard" I'm talking about that Canadian mentality that accepts this kind of garbage.
This is the sort of mentality that thinks it's okay for the sport to employ talentless players who offer nothing of value other than the ability to cheap shot the opponent, and of course, pick fights. The NHL may call these guys "enforcers", but they're really nothing but "goons", plain and simple.
And speaking of fighting, how can the sport of hockey even begin to think about banning head-shots if they're going to continue to allow fighting?
The "old guard" will tell you that a good old-fashioned fight is necessary once in a while. Really? Why?
The old-school hockey fans will tell you that fighting is a deterrent. If it is, please tell me what it's a deterrent too? If it's a deterrent to cheap-shots, why wouldn't a zero tolerance policy on cheap shots be an even better deterrent?
Face it, the NHL doesn't want to eliminate the cheap shots and the fighting because they want their sport to remain "pure." This kind of "purity" is what's stopping the sport from becoming more popular with the casual fan.
If you asked a truly die hard hockey fan, they would tell you that it's perfectly alright with them if casual fans just stayed away from their beloved sport. Yet, these are the same people that get defensive anytime you bring up WAY more popular sports like football and basketball.
Just try talking about the Steelers in a room full of diehard Penguins fans. They'll probably tell you to go to HEdoublehockeysticks.
Well, you can't have it both way, hockey fans. You can't complain when other sports get more attention than yours does if you insist that fighting and cheap shots remain a part of the game.
The NHL is the only league that really doesn't try to protect it's top stars. I mean, think about it. Can you imagine the backlash in the NFL if Tom Brady or Peyton Manning was injured and unable to play because of a cheap-shot by some talentless thug?
When Terrell Owens was injured years ago after a horse-collar tackle, the league outlawed that kind of tackling. When Tom Brady was lost for the year in week one of the 2008 season with a knee-injury, the NFL banned diving at a quarterback's knees.
It appears that the NHL has dodged a bullet with Crosby's concussion, but all it could take is another shot to the head to end his career for good.
Do you think the "old guard" would even notice or care?
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
If it wasn't for that 10-game losing-streak............
I was listening to KDKA this morning (don't ask me why), and during each half-hour sports report, stuff about the Steelers, the Panthers, and Crosby's health-concerns were covered fairly-well. It wasn't until the very end of each sports segment that the Pirates, 4-1, loss to the Houston Astros last night at PNC Park was mentioned. And it was almost mentioned as an after-thought.
Now, I don't really have much of a problem with that. The Pittsburgh Pirates have been so irrelevant for so long this time of year, I can't blame sports departments for making the team "last page" material once the pigskins start flying, and the pucks start dropping.
However, I wonder how much different things would be today if the Pirates would have avoided that horrendous 10-game losing-streak from late-July into early-August.
Right before that historic, controversial 19-inning game in Atlanta, I said that if the team could just win a few games on their seven-game trip through Atlanta and Philadelphia, the Buccos would be in great-shape heading-home to face the lowly-Cubs and Padres in a seven-game homestand. Well, despite that disappointing extra-inning loss to the Braves, the Pirates managed to split with Atlanta and were sitting at 54-49 heading-into Philly. All I wanted out of the Philadelphia series was one lousy victory. But they didn't get it.
It was okay, I thought. They would take care of the Cubs and Padres, right? What transpired was truly heart-breaking. The Pirates failed to win a single-game on the homestand and lost 10-games in a row overall.
They went from being 54-49 and fighting for first-place, to 54-59 and totally shell-shocked.
I can't help but wonder what the coverage would be like for the team today if they could have somehow managed to win four for five games instead of losing 10-straight.
What if the bullpen would have held-up in the late-innings of that final game in Philadelphia instead of blowing the lead and losing in extra-innings?
What if they could have split the series with the Cubs instead of being swept by a team they've dominated the last two seasons?
What if they would have actually shown-up for one of the games against San Diego instead of being pounded by one of the most underwhelming offenses in baseball?
Had the team managed to play .500-ball during that infamous week-and-a half, today, instead of being 65-77, they would be 70-72. Not bad.
I'm not delusional. At 70-72, the team would still be helplessly out playoff contention, but at least they'd have 82-wins and ending the years of losing as legitimate goals for everyone from the players to the fans to latch-onto down-the-stretch.
That would mean something, and I'll bet the media would give it coverage. There would probably be a song written about it and everything.
I'm not stupid. I know it wasn't just that 10-game losing streak that did-in the Buccos. Truth is, since their high-water mark of 51-44, the team has gone 14-33. Even if you add five more wins to that total, that's still a stretch of 19-28. But at 70-72, would anyone really notice the slide?
You might point to the team's 11-18 record since the end of the streak as proof that the Pirates slide was inevitable. But we all know how much of sports is mental. If the Pirates would have been able to just snag a few victories and end that 10-game slide before it even began, maybe they'd have the momentum and the right frame of mind to continue their magical, improbable 2011 run and win a few more games than they actually have the past month.
It's just a shame that that one stretch of baseball has kind of taken the luster off such a great season. I mean, the 2011 Pittsburgh Pirates were more than just a team that lost 10-games in a row and started to wilt in the heat of August. They were a team that was predicted by many to be the worst in baseball, once again, yet, they somehow managed to dance with the top dogs in the division and went 33-21 at one-point during the summer. That's magical. That's impressive.
Of course, the 10-game losing streak was just as much a part of the 2011 Pittsburgh Pirates as their occupation of first place and that 33-21 stretch was.
You can't erase it. It's like when people say that games in April don't really matter. Well, of course they do. They're just as important as the games in September. If the Red Sox lose-out to the Yankees in the AL East by a game or two, I'm sure they'll look back on their pretty horrible start to the season and realize that games in April matter.
Still though, I'm going to the game tonight with my girlfriend. I'm sure we'll have a fun time, but man, it sure would have been nice to be a part of history and witness them try and put an end to those 18-straight years of losing.
If it wasn't for that 10-game losing-streak..........
Now, I don't really have much of a problem with that. The Pittsburgh Pirates have been so irrelevant for so long this time of year, I can't blame sports departments for making the team "last page" material once the pigskins start flying, and the pucks start dropping.
However, I wonder how much different things would be today if the Pirates would have avoided that horrendous 10-game losing-streak from late-July into early-August.
Right before that historic, controversial 19-inning game in Atlanta, I said that if the team could just win a few games on their seven-game trip through Atlanta and Philadelphia, the Buccos would be in great-shape heading-home to face the lowly-Cubs and Padres in a seven-game homestand. Well, despite that disappointing extra-inning loss to the Braves, the Pirates managed to split with Atlanta and were sitting at 54-49 heading-into Philly. All I wanted out of the Philadelphia series was one lousy victory. But they didn't get it.
It was okay, I thought. They would take care of the Cubs and Padres, right? What transpired was truly heart-breaking. The Pirates failed to win a single-game on the homestand and lost 10-games in a row overall.
They went from being 54-49 and fighting for first-place, to 54-59 and totally shell-shocked.
I can't help but wonder what the coverage would be like for the team today if they could have somehow managed to win four for five games instead of losing 10-straight.
What if the bullpen would have held-up in the late-innings of that final game in Philadelphia instead of blowing the lead and losing in extra-innings?
What if they could have split the series with the Cubs instead of being swept by a team they've dominated the last two seasons?
What if they would have actually shown-up for one of the games against San Diego instead of being pounded by one of the most underwhelming offenses in baseball?
Had the team managed to play .500-ball during that infamous week-and-a half, today, instead of being 65-77, they would be 70-72. Not bad.
I'm not delusional. At 70-72, the team would still be helplessly out playoff contention, but at least they'd have 82-wins and ending the years of losing as legitimate goals for everyone from the players to the fans to latch-onto down-the-stretch.
That would mean something, and I'll bet the media would give it coverage. There would probably be a song written about it and everything.
I'm not stupid. I know it wasn't just that 10-game losing streak that did-in the Buccos. Truth is, since their high-water mark of 51-44, the team has gone 14-33. Even if you add five more wins to that total, that's still a stretch of 19-28. But at 70-72, would anyone really notice the slide?
You might point to the team's 11-18 record since the end of the streak as proof that the Pirates slide was inevitable. But we all know how much of sports is mental. If the Pirates would have been able to just snag a few victories and end that 10-game slide before it even began, maybe they'd have the momentum and the right frame of mind to continue their magical, improbable 2011 run and win a few more games than they actually have the past month.
It's just a shame that that one stretch of baseball has kind of taken the luster off such a great season. I mean, the 2011 Pittsburgh Pirates were more than just a team that lost 10-games in a row and started to wilt in the heat of August. They were a team that was predicted by many to be the worst in baseball, once again, yet, they somehow managed to dance with the top dogs in the division and went 33-21 at one-point during the summer. That's magical. That's impressive.
Of course, the 10-game losing streak was just as much a part of the 2011 Pittsburgh Pirates as their occupation of first place and that 33-21 stretch was.
You can't erase it. It's like when people say that games in April don't really matter. Well, of course they do. They're just as important as the games in September. If the Red Sox lose-out to the Yankees in the AL East by a game or two, I'm sure they'll look back on their pretty horrible start to the season and realize that games in April matter.
Still though, I'm going to the game tonight with my girlfriend. I'm sure we'll have a fun time, but man, it sure would have been nice to be a part of history and witness them try and put an end to those 18-straight years of losing.
If it wasn't for that 10-game losing-streak..........
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
The four-ton elephant in the corner of the room that people refuse to acknowledge these days: the lack of a salary cap in Major League Baseball
Back in the early-90's, when the Pirates were in the midst of winning their three-straight NL East titles, there were rumblings that it would probably be the last great era of Pirates' baseball for a very long time. The economics of the game were changing, and more and more players were signing record-breaking contracts. As for the Pirates, Bobby Bonilla, Doug Drabek, Barry Bonds, Andy Van Slyke, and John Smiley were all nearing free agency, and it was almost a foregone conclusion that the team would lose most, if not all, of those players once they hit the free agent market.
It was around '91 or so when I started hearing suggestions that a salary cap was needed for teams in cities like Pittsburgh and Kansas City to compete with teams in New York and Chicago.
Local sports personalities like Stan Savran and Bruce Keiden would discuss this on a daily-basis.
Being the young, impressionable person that I was at the time, I believed a salary cap would eventually be a part of MLB, and everything would be okay with the world.
By 1993, most of the above-mentioned Pirates superstars either left for free agency or were traded away, and the Pirates three-year window to win a World Series had come to an end.
In the summer of 1994, there was the infamous players strike that eventually eliminated the remainder of the regular season along with the playoffs and World Series.
One of the the main reasons for the strike was the owners eagerness to have a salary cap put into place in-order to off-set the growing economic disparity between small and large-market teams. The players were dead-set against such an idea and went on-strike.
At the time, I figured the owners would eventually get their way and baseball would have a cap and more of a competitive-balance.
Well, as most know, the strike eventually was settled, but without a cap in-place. The owners essentially caved and the players won out. Sure, there was a form of revenue sharing to help ease the pain, but there was nothing to stop the escalating payrolls.
I couldn't believe the owners caved. A number of years ago, former Pirates pitcher Bob Walk was discussing the 1994 strike. Just out of baseball at the time, Walk still spoke with many players around the game, and he said that the long work-stoppage had started to take its toll financially on many players and several were actually pretty close to crossing the picket-line and returning to work.
I firmly believe that if the owners would have held-out just a little longer, MLB would be operating under a salary cap today.
From about the mid-80's to the mid-90's, the New York Yankees were just another team. They were like Notre Dame is today in college football. Yes, they had a great tradition; they were one of the most storied franchises in all of sports. But nobody feared the Yankees. Well, that all changed after the 1994 strike.
The New York Yankees have been the biggest benefactors in this era of free-spending. Since 1995, the Yankees have made the postseason every year but one, they have been to the World Series seven times and have won it five times.
The Yankees are so powerful now, their advantage so great, can you ever again picture a future era when the Yankees are just another team struggling to win for a number of years? It will never happen again in the current climate of MLB.
Moving-on, by the early 00's, the talk of a salary cap had started to dissipate. Now, instead of talk of competitive-balance, people started pointing to teams like the Twins and Marlins as good example of financially-challenged teams who managed to win under the current economic-structure.
Yes, the Twins have been a model small-market team for a number of years, and other teams like the Tampa Rays, Cincinnati Reds, and Milwaukee Brewers have shown that they can win from time-to-time, but where are the World Series titles? The Twins haven't been to the World Series since 1991, back before the current economic conditions took hold of the sport.
Yes, the Rays have been to a World Series recently, but competing in the same division as the Yankees and Red Sox, who knows if they'll ever reach that level again.
In 2010, the Cincinnati Reds made their first postseason appearance since winning the World Series in 1990. What did they get for their troubles? They were on the losing end of a no-hitter in their first playoff game in two-decades and eventually swept right-out of the first round by the Philadelphia Phillies.
Yes, I know the Marlins managed to win a couple of World Series, but at what cost? After defeating the Cleveland Indians in 1997, owner Wayne Huizenga was forced to sell-off most of the pieces from that team, and in 1998, the Marlins were so bad, manager Jim Leyland asked the team's public address announcer to stop introducing them as the defending World Series Champions.
When you have to gut your franchise after winning a World Series simply out of necessity, that should tell you all you need to know.
Proponents of this current financial structure will point to teams like the Cubs and Mets as examples of large-market teams who rarely win. "Money isn't always the answer to everything." And that's right, it's not. However, it sure does help. Besides, there's a difference between winning and having a chance to win. Maybe the Cubs and Mets have inept front-offices who simply don't know how to take advantage of the system, but the opportunity will always be there if they can just figure things out.
In the NFL, where everyone operates under a salary cap, teams like the Lions and Bengals have struggled for years, but that doesn't mean they don't have the same opportunity to succeed as the Pittsburgh Steelers and New England Patriots.
And speaking of the Pittsburgh Steelers, they just played in the most recent Super Bowl against the Green Bay Packers. Green Bay is an even smaller market than Pittsburgh. Can you ever picture a scenario where the Pittsburgh Pirates face the Kansas City Royals in the World Series? I can't.
Today, fans are just expected to accept this financial climate. We're just supposed to deal with MLB being the only major professional sport without a cap.
People will tell fans of small-market teams that the sport is doing well-financially, and no change is needed.
Oh really? Well, I refuse to accept it. How can MLB expect fans in Pittsburgh and Kansas City to buy-into the same World Series dreams as fans in Chicago and Los Angeles when they know the Pirates and Royals will always be at an inherent disadvantage?
It seems that only a few teams really matter in the current state of MLB, and for whatever reason, that's okay with the higher-ups. You wouldn't think that in 2011, the needs of only a few would outweigh the needs of the many in a major professional sports league, but that's what's going on.
There was a time, back in the 70's and 80's, when the Pirates, Red, A's, and Royals were some of the most talented and successful franchises in the sport. Can you ever imagine that being the case again? I can't.
Today, if you root for a small-market team, you just have to hope that your team figures things out and can just give you a reason to celebrate, even for just a year or two.
The real shame in all of this is I used to absolutely love Major League Baseball. I still love the Pirates and am rooting like crazy for them to somehow get it together and compete under the current economic conditions. But as for baseball in-general, I don't have the love for the sport that I once did, and I can only point to the disparity between small and large market teams as the reason why.
And you would think that would really bother MLB, but it doesn't. After all, I'm not a Yankees or Red Sox fan, what does it matter how I feel?
It was around '91 or so when I started hearing suggestions that a salary cap was needed for teams in cities like Pittsburgh and Kansas City to compete with teams in New York and Chicago.
Local sports personalities like Stan Savran and Bruce Keiden would discuss this on a daily-basis.
Being the young, impressionable person that I was at the time, I believed a salary cap would eventually be a part of MLB, and everything would be okay with the world.
By 1993, most of the above-mentioned Pirates superstars either left for free agency or were traded away, and the Pirates three-year window to win a World Series had come to an end.
In the summer of 1994, there was the infamous players strike that eventually eliminated the remainder of the regular season along with the playoffs and World Series.
One of the the main reasons for the strike was the owners eagerness to have a salary cap put into place in-order to off-set the growing economic disparity between small and large-market teams. The players were dead-set against such an idea and went on-strike.
At the time, I figured the owners would eventually get their way and baseball would have a cap and more of a competitive-balance.
Well, as most know, the strike eventually was settled, but without a cap in-place. The owners essentially caved and the players won out. Sure, there was a form of revenue sharing to help ease the pain, but there was nothing to stop the escalating payrolls.
I couldn't believe the owners caved. A number of years ago, former Pirates pitcher Bob Walk was discussing the 1994 strike. Just out of baseball at the time, Walk still spoke with many players around the game, and he said that the long work-stoppage had started to take its toll financially on many players and several were actually pretty close to crossing the picket-line and returning to work.
I firmly believe that if the owners would have held-out just a little longer, MLB would be operating under a salary cap today.
From about the mid-80's to the mid-90's, the New York Yankees were just another team. They were like Notre Dame is today in college football. Yes, they had a great tradition; they were one of the most storied franchises in all of sports. But nobody feared the Yankees. Well, that all changed after the 1994 strike.
The New York Yankees have been the biggest benefactors in this era of free-spending. Since 1995, the Yankees have made the postseason every year but one, they have been to the World Series seven times and have won it five times.
The Yankees are so powerful now, their advantage so great, can you ever again picture a future era when the Yankees are just another team struggling to win for a number of years? It will never happen again in the current climate of MLB.
Moving-on, by the early 00's, the talk of a salary cap had started to dissipate. Now, instead of talk of competitive-balance, people started pointing to teams like the Twins and Marlins as good example of financially-challenged teams who managed to win under the current economic-structure.
Yes, the Twins have been a model small-market team for a number of years, and other teams like the Tampa Rays, Cincinnati Reds, and Milwaukee Brewers have shown that they can win from time-to-time, but where are the World Series titles? The Twins haven't been to the World Series since 1991, back before the current economic conditions took hold of the sport.
Yes, the Rays have been to a World Series recently, but competing in the same division as the Yankees and Red Sox, who knows if they'll ever reach that level again.
In 2010, the Cincinnati Reds made their first postseason appearance since winning the World Series in 1990. What did they get for their troubles? They were on the losing end of a no-hitter in their first playoff game in two-decades and eventually swept right-out of the first round by the Philadelphia Phillies.
Yes, I know the Marlins managed to win a couple of World Series, but at what cost? After defeating the Cleveland Indians in 1997, owner Wayne Huizenga was forced to sell-off most of the pieces from that team, and in 1998, the Marlins were so bad, manager Jim Leyland asked the team's public address announcer to stop introducing them as the defending World Series Champions.
When you have to gut your franchise after winning a World Series simply out of necessity, that should tell you all you need to know.
Proponents of this current financial structure will point to teams like the Cubs and Mets as examples of large-market teams who rarely win. "Money isn't always the answer to everything." And that's right, it's not. However, it sure does help. Besides, there's a difference between winning and having a chance to win. Maybe the Cubs and Mets have inept front-offices who simply don't know how to take advantage of the system, but the opportunity will always be there if they can just figure things out.
In the NFL, where everyone operates under a salary cap, teams like the Lions and Bengals have struggled for years, but that doesn't mean they don't have the same opportunity to succeed as the Pittsburgh Steelers and New England Patriots.
And speaking of the Pittsburgh Steelers, they just played in the most recent Super Bowl against the Green Bay Packers. Green Bay is an even smaller market than Pittsburgh. Can you ever picture a scenario where the Pittsburgh Pirates face the Kansas City Royals in the World Series? I can't.
Today, fans are just expected to accept this financial climate. We're just supposed to deal with MLB being the only major professional sport without a cap.
People will tell fans of small-market teams that the sport is doing well-financially, and no change is needed.
Oh really? Well, I refuse to accept it. How can MLB expect fans in Pittsburgh and Kansas City to buy-into the same World Series dreams as fans in Chicago and Los Angeles when they know the Pirates and Royals will always be at an inherent disadvantage?
It seems that only a few teams really matter in the current state of MLB, and for whatever reason, that's okay with the higher-ups. You wouldn't think that in 2011, the needs of only a few would outweigh the needs of the many in a major professional sports league, but that's what's going on.
There was a time, back in the 70's and 80's, when the Pirates, Red, A's, and Royals were some of the most talented and successful franchises in the sport. Can you ever imagine that being the case again? I can't.
Today, if you root for a small-market team, you just have to hope that your team figures things out and can just give you a reason to celebrate, even for just a year or two.
The real shame in all of this is I used to absolutely love Major League Baseball. I still love the Pirates and am rooting like crazy for them to somehow get it together and compete under the current economic conditions. But as for baseball in-general, I don't have the love for the sport that I once did, and I can only point to the disparity between small and large market teams as the reason why.
And you would think that would really bother MLB, but it doesn't. After all, I'm not a Yankees or Red Sox fan, what does it matter how I feel?
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
PITT to the Big 12? I suppose it's not a totally absurd possibility
Rumors have surfaced that Pitt is a possible candidate to join the Big 12 after the seemingly inevitable departure of Texas A&M to the SEC. Pitt officials have refused to comment on the matter so you know the rumors are at least somewhat true.
From a logistics standpoint, Pitt going to a conference with Missouri being the closest university at seven hours away seems absolutely ridiculous. I mean, that would be like TCU joining the Big East......oh wait. That has already happened.
I guess it could actually happen. Pitt isn't the only school rumored to be in the Big 12 mix. Notre Dame is also a possibility, so you know if Pitt is being courted by the Big 12, Notre Dame is being courted with a box of chocolates, some roses, and a limousine.
Obviously, Notre Dame would turn down such an offer because they're totally too good for conferences, so Pitt would be sloppy seconds, and I must say, it wouldn't be the worst idea ever.
From a football standpoint, the Big 12 is pretty powerful. The conference may have taken its lumps recently with the departures of Nebraska and Colorado last year, and apparently A&M in the near-future, but any conference with Texas and Oklahoma as members is a player in football regardless of who leaves and who joins.
Pitt joining would almost-instantly upgrade its football program, at least in the court of public opinion.
As for basketball? Anything other than a move to the ACC would downgrade Pitt's basketball prestige, but as we all know, football rules the roost in big-time college athletics, and besides, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Missouri, and Texas aren't exactly chopped-liver in the basketball department.
I don't know what a move like that would do to recruiting for both football and basketball. Would New York still be a pipeline for Jamie Dixon if he didn't have playing in Madison Square Garden every March as a selling-point? On the flip-side, would he be able to land more kids from the Midwest or even South if he could sell trips to Texas and Oklahoma every year?
On the football side of the coin, in my opinion, selling a conference with Texas and Oklahoma in it can only help recruiting.
I've been wondering when the next conference-shift would occur, and it looks like it will be Texas A&M to the SEC. And you just know it's not the last domino to fall. There will be others. I'm beginning to think Pitt needs to be proactive and at least try to inquire about moving to another conference. It seems like the Big East is the most vulnerable conference every time this stuff comes up. Other than TCU, there isn't anything left out there for the Big East to go after. It's always going to be the sixth conference in-terms of football-prestige. And if a WVU or Syracuse defects, it may not even be that.
Pitt needs a stable place to hang its hat even if that hat will be hanging next to a Stetson in the closet.
From a logistics standpoint, Pitt going to a conference with Missouri being the closest university at seven hours away seems absolutely ridiculous. I mean, that would be like TCU joining the Big East......oh wait. That has already happened.
I guess it could actually happen. Pitt isn't the only school rumored to be in the Big 12 mix. Notre Dame is also a possibility, so you know if Pitt is being courted by the Big 12, Notre Dame is being courted with a box of chocolates, some roses, and a limousine.
Obviously, Notre Dame would turn down such an offer because they're totally too good for conferences, so Pitt would be sloppy seconds, and I must say, it wouldn't be the worst idea ever.
From a football standpoint, the Big 12 is pretty powerful. The conference may have taken its lumps recently with the departures of Nebraska and Colorado last year, and apparently A&M in the near-future, but any conference with Texas and Oklahoma as members is a player in football regardless of who leaves and who joins.
Pitt joining would almost-instantly upgrade its football program, at least in the court of public opinion.
As for basketball? Anything other than a move to the ACC would downgrade Pitt's basketball prestige, but as we all know, football rules the roost in big-time college athletics, and besides, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Missouri, and Texas aren't exactly chopped-liver in the basketball department.
I don't know what a move like that would do to recruiting for both football and basketball. Would New York still be a pipeline for Jamie Dixon if he didn't have playing in Madison Square Garden every March as a selling-point? On the flip-side, would he be able to land more kids from the Midwest or even South if he could sell trips to Texas and Oklahoma every year?
On the football side of the coin, in my opinion, selling a conference with Texas and Oklahoma in it can only help recruiting.
I've been wondering when the next conference-shift would occur, and it looks like it will be Texas A&M to the SEC. And you just know it's not the last domino to fall. There will be others. I'm beginning to think Pitt needs to be proactive and at least try to inquire about moving to another conference. It seems like the Big East is the most vulnerable conference every time this stuff comes up. Other than TCU, there isn't anything left out there for the Big East to go after. It's always going to be the sixth conference in-terms of football-prestige. And if a WVU or Syracuse defects, it may not even be that.
Pitt needs a stable place to hang its hat even if that hat will be hanging next to a Stetson in the closet.
When will people realize that new ownership is never going to be the answer for the Pittsburgh Pirates?
I was having a conversation with some people the other day about the state of the Pirates. As is usually the case whenever I talk about the Pittsburgh Pirates, Bob Nutting came under fire. "What they need is a new ownership group. Someone that cares. Someone that is going to spend money. "
I reminded this person of the record amount the Pirates spent on the draft this season, and their willingness to take more risks and go after higher-upside players in recent drafts after shying away from such activities in seasons past.
The guy snickered and said it was just a smoke-screen. Of course, nobody trusts Nutting, or for that matter, team president Frank Coonelly or general manager Neal Huntington. After so many PR flubs in recent years, maybe it's understandable.
However, this notion of bringing in a new owner who will "spend money" has always made me laugh out-loud. People have been clamoring for a Mark Cuban-type (or Mark Cuban himself) to ride in on a white horse and save the day.
It's believed that a risk-taking, maverick owner who is willing to spend boat-loads of money is what will cure the Pirates failures, and you know what? It just might work..........for a year or two.
Mark Cuban is a billionaire many times over, and people don't get to be worth that kind of money by throwing away millions of dollars on a bad-investment, and that's exactly what any new owner would be doing if he or she purchased a small-market team like the Pittsburgh Pirates and tried to compete on the same-level as the New York Yankees and Boston Red Sox.
What would happen is Cuban would try to win for a few years (maybe even successfully) and then realize that it's not smart business to keep spending so much money out of his own pocket when he's not generating the kind of revenue that would even allow him to break-even.
As most people know, Major League Baseball is the only major professional sport in this country without a salary cap. Large-market teams will always have an inherent advantage because they're going to have a larger local television/radio deal.
Without a cap, it's damn-near impossible to compete with the Yankees, Red Sox, or even Cubs for big-time free agents when they can offer them the moon.
When people criticized the Nutting group when it was leaked that they made $35,000,000 over a course of five or six years, I, again, had to laugh. People were acting as if the Pirates should have used that money to go out and make a splash in free agency. Who were they going to sign? It's not like they made that much in one year, it took over half-a-decade to make that kind of profit. Hell, these days, the top guys are getting $15,000,000 in one year.
$35,000,000 over five years comes out to $7,000,000 a year. For that kind of money, you might be able to get a Jeromy Burnitz or Matt Morris. We all remember what studs those guys were.
I think it's fairly obvious where the Pirates ownership group has been investing that profit.
Pedro Alvarez, Jameson Taillon, Stetson Allie, and this year, Gerrit Cole and Josh Bell. Huge deals for young, unproven players with tremendous upside. They're doing exactly what a small-market team should be doing in-order to rebuild their system and stock it with talent for years to come.
2011 has been a glimpse into the future for the Pittsburgh Pirates. It's kind of easy to forget how inexperienced guys like Anderw Mccutchen, Neil Walker, Jose Tabata and Pedro Alvarez really are
And Alex Presley, Josh Harrison and Chase d'arnaud are prime examples of the new-found depth within the organization.
There is great hope for the future. On the pitching side, the team has found a bona fide closer in Joel Hanrahan to go along with a promising, young starting staff. I think we've only touched the surface for pitchers like Charlie Morton and James Mcdonald.
Jeff Karstens has come down to earth a little bit but has shown that he can be at least be a serviceable fourth or fifth starter. Before the year started, Karstens was barely on anyone's radar, but now, he's another cog for the future.
And most importantly, the Pirates have found themselves a legit Major League manager in one Clint Hurdle. He has made the team believe in itself, once again. He's made Pirates fans believe, once again.
The Pirates season isn't going to finish like we all hoped it would a month ago, but it's at least shown us that the organization is heading in the right direction.
This isn't to say that I think Bob Nutting is on par with Dan Rooney, but he's at least put a staff in-place capable of executing the small-market plan.
Why would you want a Mark Cuban to come in and hot-shot the future for a short-term fix?
I reminded this person of the record amount the Pirates spent on the draft this season, and their willingness to take more risks and go after higher-upside players in recent drafts after shying away from such activities in seasons past.
The guy snickered and said it was just a smoke-screen. Of course, nobody trusts Nutting, or for that matter, team president Frank Coonelly or general manager Neal Huntington. After so many PR flubs in recent years, maybe it's understandable.
However, this notion of bringing in a new owner who will "spend money" has always made me laugh out-loud. People have been clamoring for a Mark Cuban-type (or Mark Cuban himself) to ride in on a white horse and save the day.
It's believed that a risk-taking, maverick owner who is willing to spend boat-loads of money is what will cure the Pirates failures, and you know what? It just might work..........for a year or two.
Mark Cuban is a billionaire many times over, and people don't get to be worth that kind of money by throwing away millions of dollars on a bad-investment, and that's exactly what any new owner would be doing if he or she purchased a small-market team like the Pittsburgh Pirates and tried to compete on the same-level as the New York Yankees and Boston Red Sox.
What would happen is Cuban would try to win for a few years (maybe even successfully) and then realize that it's not smart business to keep spending so much money out of his own pocket when he's not generating the kind of revenue that would even allow him to break-even.
As most people know, Major League Baseball is the only major professional sport in this country without a salary cap. Large-market teams will always have an inherent advantage because they're going to have a larger local television/radio deal.
Without a cap, it's damn-near impossible to compete with the Yankees, Red Sox, or even Cubs for big-time free agents when they can offer them the moon.
When people criticized the Nutting group when it was leaked that they made $35,000,000 over a course of five or six years, I, again, had to laugh. People were acting as if the Pirates should have used that money to go out and make a splash in free agency. Who were they going to sign? It's not like they made that much in one year, it took over half-a-decade to make that kind of profit. Hell, these days, the top guys are getting $15,000,000 in one year.
$35,000,000 over five years comes out to $7,000,000 a year. For that kind of money, you might be able to get a Jeromy Burnitz or Matt Morris. We all remember what studs those guys were.
I think it's fairly obvious where the Pirates ownership group has been investing that profit.
Pedro Alvarez, Jameson Taillon, Stetson Allie, and this year, Gerrit Cole and Josh Bell. Huge deals for young, unproven players with tremendous upside. They're doing exactly what a small-market team should be doing in-order to rebuild their system and stock it with talent for years to come.
2011 has been a glimpse into the future for the Pittsburgh Pirates. It's kind of easy to forget how inexperienced guys like Anderw Mccutchen, Neil Walker, Jose Tabata and Pedro Alvarez really are
And Alex Presley, Josh Harrison and Chase d'arnaud are prime examples of the new-found depth within the organization.
There is great hope for the future. On the pitching side, the team has found a bona fide closer in Joel Hanrahan to go along with a promising, young starting staff. I think we've only touched the surface for pitchers like Charlie Morton and James Mcdonald.
Jeff Karstens has come down to earth a little bit but has shown that he can be at least be a serviceable fourth or fifth starter. Before the year started, Karstens was barely on anyone's radar, but now, he's another cog for the future.
And most importantly, the Pirates have found themselves a legit Major League manager in one Clint Hurdle. He has made the team believe in itself, once again. He's made Pirates fans believe, once again.
The Pirates season isn't going to finish like we all hoped it would a month ago, but it's at least shown us that the organization is heading in the right direction.
This isn't to say that I think Bob Nutting is on par with Dan Rooney, but he's at least put a staff in-place capable of executing the small-market plan.
Why would you want a Mark Cuban to come in and hot-shot the future for a short-term fix?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)