Retired Numbers Series: Toronto Blue Jays

Just over two years ago, I started the Retired Numbers Series with the intent of taking a thorough examination at every team’s history and how their outlook for future ceremonies appeared. This is the culmination of those 26 months of effort; finally, we move north of the border to cover our last team, the only still-existent non-American team, the Toronto Blue Jays. One of the newer teams in the league, the Blue Jays have taken a somewhat unique approach to honoring former players, but have as of recently started to move in a more traditional direction. What does their future hold?

Retired Numbers Series: San Francisco Giants

As the Retired Number Series quickly draws closer to an end, we’re left with only two more teams to cover. But one of them is quite a big player in the retired-number-field. The San Francisco Giants are both the final National League team and the final original sixteen team I have left. With a history dating back to 1883, only two teams have honored as many players as the Giants. Will the future bring even more?


Notes on the Numbers
Some quick notes on the stats: the two most prominent stats I used are similarly named. Both are called WAR, or Wins Above Replacement. They both try to account for every part of a player’s game, including, but not limited to: offense, defense, position, and playing time. So, it is a counting stat, like hits or home runs (with the small difference that bad seasons can actually decrease your WAR, if you are worse than a replacement player). WAR credits a player with how many wins they have provided to their team. They aren’t perfect, but for my purposes (a single number showing roughly how good a player has been), they work perfectly.

There are two major sites that provide WAR, Baseball-Reference (henceforth called bWAR) and Fangraphs (fWAR). The two are mostly the same, with the biggest difference coming from the different fielding stats the two use. Fangraphs has a fairly good summary of what makes up WAR and how it is calculated (for those wanting a more general summary, the introduction works just fine). Pitching is slightly different: Fangraphs’ WAR for pitchers, until recently (as in, after I started this series), only went back to 1974, so for my purposes, I stuck to just bWAR for them.

Retired Numbers Series: Chicago White Sox

The White Sox are the final remaining original AL team that I need to cover in my Retired Numbers Series, and boy are they a lot to cover. They have retired the second most numbers of any AL team across their 113 year history. Does that sort of fast pace leave them with any near-future choices for retired numbers? Let’s find out.


Notes on the Numbers
Some quick notes on the stats: the two most prominent stats I used are similarly named. Both are called WAR, or Wins Above Replacement. They both try to account for every part of a player’s game, including, but not limited to: offense, defense, position, and playing time. So, it is a counting stat, like hits or home runs (with the small difference that bad seasons can actually decrease your WAR, if you are worse than a replacement player). WAR credits a player with how many wins they have provided to their team. They aren’t perfect, but for my purposes (a single number showing roughly how good a player has been), they work perfectly.

There are two major sites that provide WAR, Baseball-Reference (henceforth called bWAR) and Fangraphs (fWAR). The two are mostly the same, with the biggest difference coming from the different fielding stats the two use. Fangraphs has a fairly good summary of what makes up WAR and how it is calculated (for those wanting a more general summary, the introduction works just fine). Pitching is slightly different: Fangraphs’ WAR for pitchers, until recently (as in, after I started this series), only went back to 1974, so for my purposes, I stuck to just bWAR for them.

MLB Finally Decides to Increase Instant Replay and Immediately Fails At It

Well, this is both great and awful. 

In a move emblematic of Bud Selig’s tenure as Commissioner, he stared down an obvious major problem without acting for exponentially longer than was needed to before swiftly jumping in at the last minute with a horrendously sub-optimal solution that was apparently made without any outside feedback in order to cover his legacy on his way out. Just like with steroids. Or expansion. Or the extra wild card. Or the draft. Or collusion. Or the All-Star Game. Or the Expos. Or the Athletics and Rays stadium situations. Or…

Why is it the managers’ jobs to make sure the plays are called correctly? Would it have been that hard to just stick a fifth umpire in the booth with a live feed so he can notify the field umps when replays show a call is clearly missed? Heck, they could have managed that system with pagers, since the man is so adverse to modern technology. I mean, we clearly have the ability to get the calls right. Before the system in place just ignored a solution to consistently apply a method (human umps miss calls, but all calls are in theory coming from the same set, even if each ump is different). Now, you’re introducing something that can easily standardize the officiating to make sure every call is correct…but you’re going to artificially limit it so that only some of the easily-fixable calls are fixed. What’s the point? And why introduce it specifically for the stretch-run and playoffs without any prior testing to see if this system needs any improvement? (hint: it needs a lot of improvement)

In retrospect, I’m not sure why I had my hopes up for the obvious, easy solution. It's great that MLB baseball is finally, after so many years, addressing their ability to improve officiating. I just wish they would go about it in a way that made sense.

EDIT: I've only seen rumors about it being implemented this season, so they may wait on that. Which is good, I guess.

They've compensated for that by making a needlessly-complicated, ridiculous process for entirely the wrong reasons. Which is less good.

PEDs and Lifetime Bans

I've already commented on Biogenesis stuff, so I'll keep this brief. This latest round of suspensions has brought about new calls for tougher punishments and comparisons to gambling's lifetime ban. I've been wanting to write my thoughts on this for some time, and I finally did in response to Grant Brisbee's piece over at Baseball Nation. For convenience, I'm reposting it here.

With gambling, the motive is unclear. But I would imagine it’s much easier to lose on purpose than win on purpose, making "lose on purpose" the more likely outcome-baseball is already a game with a lot of failure, and having 1/9 of your chances to actually succeed give up can be devastating to your chances. That’s not to say that players would only bet on themselves to lose, but it’s an option. If one side were trying to lose, it would be a scripted event, not a sport, and therefore, not baseball. 

With steroids, there’s a very clear motive: play better. That doesn’t challenge the integrity of the event occurring nearly as much; it’s still a competition, at least. 

And really, how is that motive any different than those for scuffing a ball, or corking a bat, or taking amphetamines, or any other number of things players have done? And yet, no one is calling for a lifetime ban for any of those. Why? You can say it’s due to how successful it is, as that doesn’t change the intent. We charge murder the same, whether it’s committed with a knife or a spoon (apologies for jumping to murder as a comparison, but I like that video). 

And really, that’s the other problem. Baseball has never tried to figure out what exactly steroids did. Let’s talk hypothetical-maybe they turn out to be as effective as a corked bat. The last two players suspended for bat corking got eight game suspensions. Steroids already get 50. Most independent studies are struggling to even prove that steroids do what we think they do. You can point to the home runs by Bonds, McGwire, and Sosa as proof, but at the same time, I can point to Neifi Perez or Freddy Galvis or Francisco Cervelli or the dozens of minor leaguers who have tested positive. And at the same time, amphetamines and other stimulants only draw a 25 game ban, and we have links from everyone from Willie Mays to Mickey Mantle to Hank Aaron taking those. A handful of anecdotes aren’t proof of anything. Do steroids help? Maybe. Are they two times worse than amphetamines? Maybe, although it’s even less clear. Are they infinitely worse to justify a lifetime ban? That seems like quite a leap. 

Maybe if people began calling for all forms of cheating to automatically draw lifetime bans, I could see it, but that seems both unlikely and overly-harsh.

Thoughts on Biogenesis and PED-Users Becoming All-Stars

In case you haven’t heard, the big news in baseball this week is the Biogenesis suspensions. After investigating the Florida-based clinic, MLB came up with a list of fourteen players to suspend, plus a few other names cleared.

Ryan Braun was suspended a few weeks ago. Monday saw the suspensions of Nelson Cruz, Jhonny Peralta, Everth Cabrera, Antonio Bastardo, Jesus Montero, Francisco Cervelli, Jordany Valdespin, Fautino De Los Santos, Jordan Norberto, Cesar Puello, Fernando Martinez, and Sergio Escalona. In addition to those thirteen, Alex Rodriguez is appealing his own suspension (which, for some reason, is three to four times harsher than every other player involved, but that’s another can of worms), while Melky Cabrera, Bartolo Colon, and Yasmani Grandal were all cleared of additional wrongdoing (all three were given suspensions last year).

Everyone likes to focus on Rodriguez and Braun, as they are the biggest names involved. Even Cruz and Peralta are drawing attention, thanks to playing key roles on pennant teams. However, I think the other names on the list are what make it interesting.

I’m going to be honest, there were players on this list that I have never heard of, and I consider myself a passionate baseball fan. I just somehow had never come across Jordan Norberto, Sergio Escalona, or Cesar Puello until their names turned up. That made me think, though.

The Colby Rasmus Trade: A Two-Year Retrospective

It’s minor news, so it took me a while to get around to writing about it, but the Cardinals finally traded reliever Marc Rzepczynski to the Cleveland Indians. This marks the end of one half of a trade I covered quite a bit two years ago. The Cardinals, in preparation of a stretch run, traded away then-24-year-old center fielder Colby Rasmus (and three bullpen arms who would all leave the team by the next season) to Toronto. In exchange, the Blue Jays sent over Edwin Jackson, Corey Patterson, Octavio Dotel, and Rzepczynski.

With the trade of Rzepczynski, Rasmus now stands as the only person involved in that trade still on the team he was sent to. On one hand, the Cardinals went on to win the World Series, in part due to the some of the bullpen arms. The old adage of “flags fly forever" is pretty compelling. Did those parts play a large role in the unstoppable machine that was the Cardinals’ World Series run?

Well, Patterson sure didn’t help, posting an OPS+ of 17 in 44 games and being left off the roster, although he was more of a throw-in to balance roster spots and salary. What about the other three?

The Future Forty 2013: Predicting Today's Hall of Famers of Tomorrow

In honor of this past weekend’s Hall of Fame induction ceremony, I figured I may as well take a break from my normal stuff to do a fun speculation article. Since I’ve seen a few articles like this, and especially since I’ve done a decent amount of examination of Hall voting, I may as well take a shot at “Who are the Hall of Famers playing now” piece.

In honor of this past weekend’s Hall of Fame induction ceremony, I figured I may as well take a break from my normal stuff to do a fun speculation article. Since I’ve seen a few articles like this, and especially since I’ve done a decent amount of examination of Hall voting, I may as well take a shot at “Who are the Hall of Famers playing now” piece.

Now, if you look at my piece from last year, you’ll see that there are typically 40 players in the game at any one time who will eventually make the Hall of Fame. If the Hall ever corrects for expansion and it’s falling induction rate, we may see as many as 50 or 64 players inducted. Let’s use those as a starting point. I’ll make special notes if I think a player is more in the top 50 or 64 rather than top 40.

An Early Look at Yadier Molina, His Career, and the Hall of Fame

After the All-Star game, the dead period after the event but before season restarted led to the normal set of columns to fill the time, including the midseason awards piece. One fairly common choice for NL MVP appears to be Yadier Molina, who’s leading the National League in batting average and having a career year to follow up last year’s career year, fourth-place MVP finish season (which was itself a follow up to his at-the-time career year in 2011). I won’t be debating whether he should be the NL MVP yet; there’ll be plenty of time to do that after the season.

What I want to do is much bigger-picture; what do Yadi’s Hall of Fame chances look like? I realize there’s still a lot to go in his career, especially if the follow-up to this MVP-esque campaign is anything close to how this one is going. But I enjoy looking towards the future, and now is as good a time to start. Think of it as “what would Yadier need to do to become a Hall of Famer?” if that’s easier to digest.

Philadelphia Phillies Should Be Selling at the Deadline

We’re drawing closer and closer to the July 31st Trade Deadline, and teams are starting to feel out their places in the buyer-seller dynamic. One surprising possible buyer, though, is the Philadelphia Phillies.

As we leave the All-Star Break, the Phillies stand at exactly .500, 48-48. They’re only 6.5 games behind the division-leading Braves and 5 behind the second wild card Reds. All in all, that seems like solid reasoning, right? Maybe the record isn’t encouraging, but only 5 games behind a playoff spot is good.

Retired Numbers Series: Milwaukee Brewers

Following the departure of the Braves in 1965, Milwaukee managed to draw in the Seattle Pilots a year after the latter were a part of the second round of 1960s expansion, renaming them the Brewers. Since then, the Brewers have become both the smallest market with a team and a huge local draw. How does the future look like it will play out for this little team that could?

2013 All-Star Roster Corrections: NL Edition

I would say Bruce Bochy/the NL All-Star Squad out-sensibled Jim Leyland/the AL/whoever’s responsible for the mess that is All-Star selection. While making the roster, I felt like it was the other way around; I was making all sorts of changes on the NL roster. Then I realized that a lot of that was fixing problems the fans made in voting, something that miraculously (almost) didn’t happen at all in the AL. Between these two, these may be the most reasonable All-Star Rosters that I’ve covered.

On top of that, a lot of the picks in the NL wound up feeling almost like personal preference picks, like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic (or Queen Mary*, depending on how you feel about the NL’s chances this year, I suppose).

*I guess this sort of destroys the comparison, though. Either way.

I would like to add that, where the AL is stacked at second and third base, the NL is well-stocked behind the plate, at shortstop, and in the outfield. I couldn’t even fit people like Brian McCann or Evan Gattis in, and young stars like Giancarlo Stanton and Jason Heyward had just enough bad luck in their years to let a bunch of other players into the discussion (but more on the mess that is the outfield once I get to it).

2013 All-Star Roster Corrections: AL Edition

Now, this is the article where I would normally take a faux-condescending tone to mock MLB’s All-Star game selections. After all, that’s what I’ve done for the past three years. But this year, the rosters aren’t as mind-bogglingly awful as they have been in those past few years. Maybe they’ve been listening to me finally.

This isn’t to say that there aren’t problems, though. We’re mostly just short on the completely clueless picks, with them being replaced by picks that are just disappointing. Or maybe it’s just me learning to not get as bent out of shape over the All-Star. Either way, there are still corrections to make.

Do Yasiel Puig and Bryce Harper Belong in the All-Star Game?

Bryce Harper and Yasiel Puig have been stirring up a lot of discussion lately with regards to the All Star Game. They make for an interesting discussion on the meaning of the All Star Game, whether it’s for the best players this season, or the best players for the last calendar year, or the most notable players, or something in between.

From one aspect, if your goal is to make the best team possible for the purpose of winning the game, doesn’t taking Harper and Puig (injuries aside) make the most sense? They’re some of the most talented players in the game. But if you are talking from a standpoint of performance, can you still justify taking them?

Retired Numbers Series: Oakland Athletics

The Athletics have arguably had more identities than any other team in the Majors. With a history spanning three cities (and possibly counting), over 110 seasons, and several distinct eras, they should have numerous interesting players to honor. However, no original team, in the American or National league, has as few retired numbers as the A’s. What does the future hold for them?