After 13 games of the 2012 NFL season, the Denver Broncos, riding an eight-game inning streak and sporting a 10-3 record, had established themselves as a legitimate playoff contender. But because they had lost three games to teams who have since claimed division titles -- Atlanta, New England, and Houston -- earlier this season, there was some question as to whether they could also be considered a Super Bowl contender. Would the Broncos become just another "one-and-done" team?
On December 16th, the Denver Broncos answered that question authoritatively, and yes, they can now be anointed as legitimate Super Bowl contenders. The Broncos went into the back yard of the Baltimore Ravens, a first-place team in the AFC's North Division with one of the NFL's toughest defenses, and thrashed the Ravens 34-17. And the game wasn't really as close as the score indicated; at the end of three quarters, the Broncos were leading 31-3.
The Broncos dominated the Ravens in every facet of the game. They possessed the ball 17 minutes longer than the Ravens. They had nine more first downs than the Ravens, They outgained them in total yardage, 350-278. The Broncos converted five of 16 third down opportunities. And yes, they got the big defensive play of the game -- a 98-yard interception return by Chris Harris with just 15 seconds left in the first half to give the Broncos a 17-0 halftime lead; it was the longest regular-season interception return in Broncos history. The defense pressured Joe Flacco all day so he only completed 50 percent of his passes, although his game score of 76.5 was not much worse the Peyton Manning's game score of 94.9.
It's impressive enough that the Broncos could beat the Ravens by this magnitude in the first place. But to do it on the road - IN BALTIMORE -- clearly shows they have the ability to win anywhere at anytime this season. And that marks them as a true Super Bowl contender, able to defeat New England and whoever represents the NFC. Chris Harris echoed that theme after the game when he said "You come to the Ravens' house and beat them handily, it's definitely a statement game. We definitely wanted to show to everybody that we're an elite team." Some purists might even consider an AFC conference championship game between Denver and new England to be the real Super Bowl this year. Denver's next objective is to end up one of the two playoff teams with a first round bye, allowing them to rest up from their aches and pains for an extra week. Currently, New England and Houston occupy the top two AFC spots which would give them the bye.
Reaction: ESPN blogger Bill Williamson says the turning point of the game was Chris Harris' interception return. Considering he ran it back for 98 yards, I would have to agree. Williamson adds that although Manning continued his MVP pace by completing 17 of 28 passes for 204 yards and a touchdown, the Broncos great defense and the ground success makes them more than a one-man team. Another ESPN blogger, Jamison Hensley, fears the Ravens could miss the playoffs altogether, although it would require they lose their last two games. Their performance against Denver today makes that a possibility, particularly if the resurgent Indianapolis Colts win or tie any of last three games.
It's a great day to be a Bronco fan. The wreckage of the Josh McDaniels era is behind us. John Elway knew what he was doing when he romanced Peyton Manning.
Sunday, December 16, 2012
Friday, December 14, 2012
If You Can't Outpitch Them, Outhit Them: Los Angeles Angels Lose Out On Zack Greinke, Take Josh Hamilton As Consolation Prize
I guess Los Angeles Angels' General Manager Jerry Dipoto decided that if you can't outpitch them, then you outhit them instead. After losing out on the Zack Greinke sweepstakes to the Los Angeles Dodgers, they scored a valuable consolation prize in hard-hitting Texas Rangers' outfielder Josh Hamilton, signing him to a five-year, $125 million contract. This is less than the guaranteed $147 million for six years offered Greinke by the Dodgers.
Hamilton would become the Angels' left fielder, joining Mike Trout in center field and Mark Trumbo in left field. He is younger and adds considerably more power than the departed left fielder Torii Hunter, who chose to sign with Detroit. While Josh Hamilton has a reputation for streakiness on offense and has had to work through a few personal issues, he is still one of the most dangerous offensive players in the game. In 2012, he smacked a career-high 43 home runs and drove in 128 runs; he's hit as high as .359 in 2010.
But all this offense was displayed as a Texas Ranger. The Rangers play their home games in one of the most hitter-friendly parks in the major leagues. In contrast, Anaheim Stadium is more of a pitcher's park. So can Hamilton produce offensively in Anaheim? ESPN's Michael Veneziano seems to think so; his analysis revealed that only one the homers Hamilton hit last year would not have gone out of Anaheim Stadium.
However, Rangers Ballpark sits at a higher elevation and has warmer temperatures during the summer, both of which cause balls to go further. In contrast, night games at Anaheim Stadium are played at sea level and the air is cooler and heavier when the marine layer moves in. Thus we can expect some decrease in Hamilton's home run totals. How much? Let's look at Albert Pujols for an example. In his first year as an Angel in 2012, he dropped from 37 homers to 30. While some of that may be attributable to adjusting to American League pitching, some of it must also be attributable to the stadium. Thus we can expect Josh Hamilton to produce 30-35 home runs; anything beyond 35 would be a bonus. Combined with a .300 batting average, that would be a productive year. By the way, Hamilton is batting .260 and slugging .440 at Angels Stadium in his career, while he has a .315 BA and .592 slugging percentage at Rangers Ballpark.
Hamilton would become the Angels' left fielder, joining Mike Trout in center field and Mark Trumbo in left field. He is younger and adds considerably more power than the departed left fielder Torii Hunter, who chose to sign with Detroit. While Josh Hamilton has a reputation for streakiness on offense and has had to work through a few personal issues, he is still one of the most dangerous offensive players in the game. In 2012, he smacked a career-high 43 home runs and drove in 128 runs; he's hit as high as .359 in 2010.
But all this offense was displayed as a Texas Ranger. The Rangers play their home games in one of the most hitter-friendly parks in the major leagues. In contrast, Anaheim Stadium is more of a pitcher's park. So can Hamilton produce offensively in Anaheim? ESPN's Michael Veneziano seems to think so; his analysis revealed that only one the homers Hamilton hit last year would not have gone out of Anaheim Stadium.
However, Rangers Ballpark sits at a higher elevation and has warmer temperatures during the summer, both of which cause balls to go further. In contrast, night games at Anaheim Stadium are played at sea level and the air is cooler and heavier when the marine layer moves in. Thus we can expect some decrease in Hamilton's home run totals. How much? Let's look at Albert Pujols for an example. In his first year as an Angel in 2012, he dropped from 37 homers to 30. While some of that may be attributable to adjusting to American League pitching, some of it must also be attributable to the stadium. Thus we can expect Josh Hamilton to produce 30-35 home runs; anything beyond 35 would be a bonus. Combined with a .300 batting average, that would be a productive year. By the way, Hamilton is batting .260 and slugging .440 at Angels Stadium in his career, while he has a .315 BA and .592 slugging percentage at Rangers Ballpark.
Thursday, December 6, 2012
As Zack Greinke Eyes Texas, Los Angeles Angels Sign Starter Joe Blanton And Reliever Sean Burnett
It appears that those of us Angels fans who were hoping that Zack Greinke would re-sign with the Halos will be disappointed. The word from ESPN on December 6th, 2012 is that he's leaning towards the Texas Rangers, which will make them stronger. Update: Greinke eventually signed with the Los Angeles Dodgers for six years at a guaranteed $147 million.
But it appears the Angels already accounted for that possibility. On December 5th, they announced the signing of free agent Joe Blanton to a two-year contract worth $15 million, with a club option for a third year. The right-hander split time between the Philadelphia Phillies and the Los Angeles Dodgers in 2012, compiling a 10-13, 4.71 record.
The one advantage Blanton brings to the table is that he can eat up innings -- when he's healthy. Blanton missed much of 2011 with a right elbow injury. In 2012, he worked 191 innings. He also knows where he's throwing; he walked only 34 batters and struck out 167 for an excellent 4.88 strikeouts-to-walks ratio. Unfortunately, he either doesn't put enough mustard on the ball, or else he can't move it around the strike zone deceptively enough, because he also yielded 207 hits and served up 29 homers. Ervin Santana had the same problem in 2012, and the Angels dumped him to Kansas City for a song. Halos Daily points out that the heavier air at Anaheim Stadium could suppress Blanton's gopher balls, and that some of those deep flies could be reeled in by flyhawks such as Peter Bourjos and Mike Trout. Blanton's career ERA is 4.37, and in only two seasons did he post an ERA of less than 4.00. This is offset somewhat by a winning 83-75 lifetime record.
So now an Angels starting rotation of Jered Weaver, C.J. Wilson, Tommy Hanson, and Joe Blanton takes shape, with Jerome Williams and Garrett Richards competing for the number five spot. This is a rotation which can win if backed up by a good bullpen. And the Angels took another step towards strengthening that bullpen by signing left-handed middle reliever Sean Burnett away from the Washington Nationals pending completion of a physical. Despite posting a 1-2, 2.38 record with 31 holds in 2012, Burnett pitched the entire second half with a bone spur in his left elbow, which required relatively minor surgery following the postseason, so the physical is a precaution to determine his recovery progress. The Los Angeles Times reports that Burnett signed for two years at $8 million.
Thus Burnett joins a bullpen already headed up by Ernesto Frieri, Kevin Jepsen, and newcomer Ryan Madson. Despite Frieri's success as a closer in 2012, the Angels have already penciled in Madson as their closer for 2013, thinking that Frieri can be more helpful as a middle reliever where they were plagued with inconsistency in 2012. Madson had 32 saves for the Phillies in 2011; he was injured all of 2012. Scott Downs is also slated to return in 2013.
Maybe it's a good thing that the Angels decided to get two lesser but still useful pitchers for the same price they would have paid for Zack Greinke.
But it appears the Angels already accounted for that possibility. On December 5th, they announced the signing of free agent Joe Blanton to a two-year contract worth $15 million, with a club option for a third year. The right-hander split time between the Philadelphia Phillies and the Los Angeles Dodgers in 2012, compiling a 10-13, 4.71 record.
The one advantage Blanton brings to the table is that he can eat up innings -- when he's healthy. Blanton missed much of 2011 with a right elbow injury. In 2012, he worked 191 innings. He also knows where he's throwing; he walked only 34 batters and struck out 167 for an excellent 4.88 strikeouts-to-walks ratio. Unfortunately, he either doesn't put enough mustard on the ball, or else he can't move it around the strike zone deceptively enough, because he also yielded 207 hits and served up 29 homers. Ervin Santana had the same problem in 2012, and the Angels dumped him to Kansas City for a song. Halos Daily points out that the heavier air at Anaheim Stadium could suppress Blanton's gopher balls, and that some of those deep flies could be reeled in by flyhawks such as Peter Bourjos and Mike Trout. Blanton's career ERA is 4.37, and in only two seasons did he post an ERA of less than 4.00. This is offset somewhat by a winning 83-75 lifetime record.
So now an Angels starting rotation of Jered Weaver, C.J. Wilson, Tommy Hanson, and Joe Blanton takes shape, with Jerome Williams and Garrett Richards competing for the number five spot. This is a rotation which can win if backed up by a good bullpen. And the Angels took another step towards strengthening that bullpen by signing left-handed middle reliever Sean Burnett away from the Washington Nationals pending completion of a physical. Despite posting a 1-2, 2.38 record with 31 holds in 2012, Burnett pitched the entire second half with a bone spur in his left elbow, which required relatively minor surgery following the postseason, so the physical is a precaution to determine his recovery progress. The Los Angeles Times reports that Burnett signed for two years at $8 million.
Thus Burnett joins a bullpen already headed up by Ernesto Frieri, Kevin Jepsen, and newcomer Ryan Madson. Despite Frieri's success as a closer in 2012, the Angels have already penciled in Madson as their closer for 2013, thinking that Frieri can be more helpful as a middle reliever where they were plagued with inconsistency in 2012. Madson had 32 saves for the Phillies in 2011; he was injured all of 2012. Scott Downs is also slated to return in 2013.
Maybe it's a good thing that the Angels decided to get two lesser but still useful pitchers for the same price they would have paid for Zack Greinke.
Birth Mother Of San Francisco 49ers Quarterback Colin Kaepernick Wants To "Reconnect" With Him Now That His Salary Is $1,164,610
The career of San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick has shifted into the fast lane ever since Coach Jim Harbaugh decided to anoint him as the starter over Alex Smith after Smith got knocked out with a concussion in the 49ers' 24-24 tie with St. Louis on November 11th, 2012. Although Smith is now ready to play, Harbaugh has decided to stick with Kaepernick for the time being, even though the boo-birds are already hollering for Kaepernick's scalp after he made a couple of questionable plays in a 16-13 loss in the return match with the Rams on December 2nd.
Now, all of a sudden, we're finding out that Kaepernick's birth mother wants to "reconnect" with him. Heidi Russo gave up Kaepernick for adoption when he was just an infant because she felt she could not raise him adequately. She was 18 years old, had gotten pregnant out of wedlock, and for undisclosed reasons, did not marry the father. Nevertheless, Russo remained in contact with Colin and his adoptive parents, Rick and Teresa Kaepernick, until Colin turned seven, then the pictures and letters stopped arriving. Since that time, Colin has exchanged a few messages with her, but most of Heidi's tweets have gone unreturned. Heidi professes to have maintained an interest in Colin's growth, having seen Kaepernick play football in person for the first time in 2010 when his University of Nevada-Reno team played at Colorado State. Heidi also professes to have the highest respect for Colin's adoptive parents, who she met again on August 26th, 2012 when she attended the 49ers' preseason game at Denver. Colin did not want to meet with her on that occasion.
Heidi acknowledges the possibility that Colin may not ever want to meet with her. There could be a number of reasons for his reluctance. Denver Broncos tight end Virgil Green, a teammate and roommate of Kaepernick's at Nevada, speculates that Kaepernick might consider it an act of disloyalty towards his adoptive parents to meet with his birth mother. "I've been out to dinner with them and you can see the job they did raising him. I think he would view it as almost treasonous to them to meet with his biological mother or father. They did such a great job giving him everything he needed to be successful in life", explained Green.
But there could be another reason. Colin Kaepernick is now a starting NFL quarterback with a team considered to be a Super Bowl contender. This means a Super Bowl winner's share, in addition to his current salary of $1,164,610. So perhaps Kaepernick is concerned about the possibility that his birth mother wants to renew the relationship in order to exploit him financially. It's happened to other people; highly-paid professional athletes are attractive targets for financial exploitation.
Of course, it is possible that Heidi Russo simply cares about her birth son deeply and genuinely wants to be a part of his life. She's currently a registered nurse, a profession in which there will always be a demand for her services, so it is unlikely that she has any financial problems. But this controversy serves as a reason why it is always best for someone who gives up a child for adoption at birth to permanently remain out of the child's new life, except to make ancestry information available to the child later for medical reasons. If Heidi Russo truly loves her son, she will quit "stalking" him and allow him to be the sole determinant as to whether or not they form a relationship.
Now, all of a sudden, we're finding out that Kaepernick's birth mother wants to "reconnect" with him. Heidi Russo gave up Kaepernick for adoption when he was just an infant because she felt she could not raise him adequately. She was 18 years old, had gotten pregnant out of wedlock, and for undisclosed reasons, did not marry the father. Nevertheless, Russo remained in contact with Colin and his adoptive parents, Rick and Teresa Kaepernick, until Colin turned seven, then the pictures and letters stopped arriving. Since that time, Colin has exchanged a few messages with her, but most of Heidi's tweets have gone unreturned. Heidi professes to have maintained an interest in Colin's growth, having seen Kaepernick play football in person for the first time in 2010 when his University of Nevada-Reno team played at Colorado State. Heidi also professes to have the highest respect for Colin's adoptive parents, who she met again on August 26th, 2012 when she attended the 49ers' preseason game at Denver. Colin did not want to meet with her on that occasion.
Heidi acknowledges the possibility that Colin may not ever want to meet with her. There could be a number of reasons for his reluctance. Denver Broncos tight end Virgil Green, a teammate and roommate of Kaepernick's at Nevada, speculates that Kaepernick might consider it an act of disloyalty towards his adoptive parents to meet with his birth mother. "I've been out to dinner with them and you can see the job they did raising him. I think he would view it as almost treasonous to them to meet with his biological mother or father. They did such a great job giving him everything he needed to be successful in life", explained Green.
But there could be another reason. Colin Kaepernick is now a starting NFL quarterback with a team considered to be a Super Bowl contender. This means a Super Bowl winner's share, in addition to his current salary of $1,164,610. So perhaps Kaepernick is concerned about the possibility that his birth mother wants to renew the relationship in order to exploit him financially. It's happened to other people; highly-paid professional athletes are attractive targets for financial exploitation.
Of course, it is possible that Heidi Russo simply cares about her birth son deeply and genuinely wants to be a part of his life. She's currently a registered nurse, a profession in which there will always be a demand for her services, so it is unlikely that she has any financial problems. But this controversy serves as a reason why it is always best for someone who gives up a child for adoption at birth to permanently remain out of the child's new life, except to make ancestry information available to the child later for medical reasons. If Heidi Russo truly loves her son, she will quit "stalking" him and allow him to be the sole determinant as to whether or not they form a relationship.
Tuesday, December 4, 2012
Dan Haren Reportedly Signs With Washington Nationals Pending Physical; May Come Back To Haunt The Angels
ESPN is reporting that Los Angeles Angels pitcher Dan Haren, whose contract was bought out by the Angels for $3.5 million in November, has signed with the Washington Nationals, although the signing is contingent upon a successful physical. Haren's performance was impeded by back problems during the 2012 season. Halos Daily reports the contract is for one year at $13.0 million.
If healthy, Dan Haren would provide veteran leadership to a Nationals rotation already including Stephen Strasburg, Gio Gonzalez, Jordan Zimmermann and Ross Detwiler, which helped lead the Nats to the National League Eastern Division title in 2012. One of Haren's past strengths has been his durability; he's made at least 30 starts in eight straight years. Last year was his first time on the disabled list.
However, this move could come back to bite the Angels in the ass. The Angels already dumped Ervin Santana, who blew up to a 9-13, 5.16 record in 2012 when he coughed up an AL-leading 39 home runs, and it is uncertain if they can re-sign Zack Greinke, who's being arduously romanced by the free-spending Los Angeles Dodgers as of this post. The Angels did try to fill the prospective gap by trading reliever Jordan Walden to Atlanta for starter Tommy Hanson, but guess what? Like Dan Haren, Hanson also had back problems in 2012. Hanson was 10-5, 3.71 before the All-Star break, but 3-5, 5.69 in the second half after he went on the disabled list from July 31st to August 17th with a lower back strain.
I guess the Angels think a 26-year-old with a back history is a less risky investment than a 31-year-old with a back history.
The Angels still have 20-win ace Jered Weaver and C.J. Wilson, but Wilson was a bit inconsistent during the second half of the season. After getting off to a 9-4, 2.36 start through June 26th, Wilson went 4-6, 5.24 the rest of the way. Then there's Greinke -- IF he can be re-signed. Then there's Hanson, who must prove he's overcome his back problems. Then we have to hope that Jerome Williams and Garrett Richards can pan out; both were inconsistent at times in 2012. While Williams at least has pinpoint control, the same cannot be said for Richards, who walked one batter every two innings.
If Greinke doesn't re-sign and Williams and Richards don't rise to the occasion, the Angels will wish they had Haren back, particularly if Haren returns to form. Haren is a workhorse who can eat up innings. Perhaps the Angels got a bit gun-shy after being burned so bad by Scott Kazmir and disappointed by Joel Piniero, but it's possible they may have pulled the trigger on Dan Haren a bit too quickly. If Haren's back to normal, the Washington Nationals become the overwhelming favorite to win the N.L. East in 2013 -- and can be spoken of as a potential World Series champion.
If healthy, Dan Haren would provide veteran leadership to a Nationals rotation already including Stephen Strasburg, Gio Gonzalez, Jordan Zimmermann and Ross Detwiler, which helped lead the Nats to the National League Eastern Division title in 2012. One of Haren's past strengths has been his durability; he's made at least 30 starts in eight straight years. Last year was his first time on the disabled list.
However, this move could come back to bite the Angels in the ass. The Angels already dumped Ervin Santana, who blew up to a 9-13, 5.16 record in 2012 when he coughed up an AL-leading 39 home runs, and it is uncertain if they can re-sign Zack Greinke, who's being arduously romanced by the free-spending Los Angeles Dodgers as of this post. The Angels did try to fill the prospective gap by trading reliever Jordan Walden to Atlanta for starter Tommy Hanson, but guess what? Like Dan Haren, Hanson also had back problems in 2012. Hanson was 10-5, 3.71 before the All-Star break, but 3-5, 5.69 in the second half after he went on the disabled list from July 31st to August 17th with a lower back strain.
I guess the Angels think a 26-year-old with a back history is a less risky investment than a 31-year-old with a back history.
The Angels still have 20-win ace Jered Weaver and C.J. Wilson, but Wilson was a bit inconsistent during the second half of the season. After getting off to a 9-4, 2.36 start through June 26th, Wilson went 4-6, 5.24 the rest of the way. Then there's Greinke -- IF he can be re-signed. Then there's Hanson, who must prove he's overcome his back problems. Then we have to hope that Jerome Williams and Garrett Richards can pan out; both were inconsistent at times in 2012. While Williams at least has pinpoint control, the same cannot be said for Richards, who walked one batter every two innings.
If Greinke doesn't re-sign and Williams and Richards don't rise to the occasion, the Angels will wish they had Haren back, particularly if Haren returns to form. Haren is a workhorse who can eat up innings. Perhaps the Angels got a bit gun-shy after being burned so bad by Scott Kazmir and disappointed by Joel Piniero, but it's possible they may have pulled the trigger on Dan Haren a bit too quickly. If Haren's back to normal, the Washington Nationals become the overwhelming favorite to win the N.L. East in 2013 -- and can be spoken of as a potential World Series champion.
Friday, November 30, 2012
AP Survey Indicates Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, And Sammy Sosa Won't Get Enough Votes For The Hall Of Fame In 2013
Apparently the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA) can't overlook the association of Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, and Sammy Sosa with performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs). On November 30th, 2012, ESPN reports that a survey of prospective voters by the Associated Press indicates that Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, and Sammy Sosa will not get enough votes for induction into the Hall of Fame on their first try in 2013. In fact, Sosa fares worst of all.
Players need to be named on at least 75 percent on BBWAA ballots for inclusion. Ballots must be submitted to the BBWAA by December 31st, and selections will be announced on January 9th, 2013. Inductions will take place on July 28th. Among voters who expressed an opinion, Bonds received 45 percent support, Clemens 43 percent and Sosa 18 percent. To gain election, Bonds and Clemens would need more than 80 percent support among the voters not surveyed and Sosa would need to get more than 85 percent.
Bonds has denied knowingly using steroids, although a positive test was introduced as evidence during his criminal trial in 2011, in which the jury hung. Clemens has repeatedly denied drug use and was acquitted in 2012 on charges he lied to Congress when he said he didn't take steroids or human growth hormone. Although Sosa was among the 104 positive tests in baseball's 2003 anonymous survey, he told a congressional committee in 2005 that he never took illegal performance-enhancing drugs. But despite the denials, David Lariviere still thinks there's enough evidence against the three, writing "As a voter for 20 years, there is no way I could vote for any of these three men simply because there is more than enough evidence that they cheated at least once and, most likely, more often. Obviously, there’s no way to know how often they used the performance-enhancing drugs and how much it elevated their statistics, which should automatically disqualify them" in Forbes. But Lariviere presents no objective evidence, believing that mere association with PEDs automatically creates a character issue.
Also typical of those opposed to their inclusion is Thom Loverro, a columnist for The Washington Examiner, who wrote "No one would dare say that Bonds, a seven-time National League MVP with 762 home runs, isn't a Hall of Famer. Nor would anyone say that Clemens, with 354 career victories, 4,672 strikeouts and seven Cy Young Awards, shouldn't be enshrined in Cooperstown. The same goes for Sosa, who finished with 609 career home runs, including 243 of them from 1998 through 2001. Except they cheated -- all of them. And this Hall of Fame is not just about numbers. Three of the six criteria for election to Cooperstown are sportsmanship, integrity and character. Bonds, Sosa and Clemens fail on all three counts."
But typical of those who don't object to their inclusion is San Francisco Chronicle columnist Bruce Jenkins, who wrote in an e-mail response "The Hall of Fame's 'character' clause should be stricken immediately, because it's far too late to turn Cooperstown into a church. Whether it was gambling (rampant in the early 20th century), scuffing the baseballs, corking bats, amphetamines or steroids, players have been cheating like crazy forever. It's an integral, if unsavory, part of the culture. I've always had the same criteria: which players were the best performers of their particular era -- so absolutely, I'll vote for Bonds, Clemens and Sosa."
The distinction between Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens on the one hand, and Sammy Sosa on the other, also has to do with their career records. Jim Caple of ESPN.com believes Bonds and Clemens have stronger resumes than Sosa. The public echoes this distinction in a current Sports Nation poll which now shows Bonds with 44.5 percent, Clemens with 44.0 percent, and Sosa with only 25.7 percent. I agree with this assessment because Bonds and Clemens were more consistent throughout their careers, while Sosa was not particularly productive during the first four years of his career. But Jon Greenberg of ESPN Chicago thinks Sosa's "good" years were simply too good for Sosa to be delayed or passed up.
Bleacher Report writes, "Regardless of what you think of them as people, there was nothing illegal about what they did and they weren't the only ones doing it. Voting individuals need to get off their high horses and address the different baseball culture that existed in the early '90s and 2000s". And the "cheating" argument loses its punch when you consider that Gaylord Perry, who wrote a book confessing to using the spitter as his "out" pitch for several years, is ALSO in the Hall of Fame. Unless Bonds, Clemens, and Sosa either confess to using PEDs or objective evidence appears, this should not ban them from the Hall of Fame.
Players need to be named on at least 75 percent on BBWAA ballots for inclusion. Ballots must be submitted to the BBWAA by December 31st, and selections will be announced on January 9th, 2013. Inductions will take place on July 28th. Among voters who expressed an opinion, Bonds received 45 percent support, Clemens 43 percent and Sosa 18 percent. To gain election, Bonds and Clemens would need more than 80 percent support among the voters not surveyed and Sosa would need to get more than 85 percent.
Bonds has denied knowingly using steroids, although a positive test was introduced as evidence during his criminal trial in 2011, in which the jury hung. Clemens has repeatedly denied drug use and was acquitted in 2012 on charges he lied to Congress when he said he didn't take steroids or human growth hormone. Although Sosa was among the 104 positive tests in baseball's 2003 anonymous survey, he told a congressional committee in 2005 that he never took illegal performance-enhancing drugs. But despite the denials, David Lariviere still thinks there's enough evidence against the three, writing "As a voter for 20 years, there is no way I could vote for any of these three men simply because there is more than enough evidence that they cheated at least once and, most likely, more often. Obviously, there’s no way to know how often they used the performance-enhancing drugs and how much it elevated their statistics, which should automatically disqualify them" in Forbes. But Lariviere presents no objective evidence, believing that mere association with PEDs automatically creates a character issue.
Also typical of those opposed to their inclusion is Thom Loverro, a columnist for The Washington Examiner, who wrote "No one would dare say that Bonds, a seven-time National League MVP with 762 home runs, isn't a Hall of Famer. Nor would anyone say that Clemens, with 354 career victories, 4,672 strikeouts and seven Cy Young Awards, shouldn't be enshrined in Cooperstown. The same goes for Sosa, who finished with 609 career home runs, including 243 of them from 1998 through 2001. Except they cheated -- all of them. And this Hall of Fame is not just about numbers. Three of the six criteria for election to Cooperstown are sportsmanship, integrity and character. Bonds, Sosa and Clemens fail on all three counts."
But typical of those who don't object to their inclusion is San Francisco Chronicle columnist Bruce Jenkins, who wrote in an e-mail response "The Hall of Fame's 'character' clause should be stricken immediately, because it's far too late to turn Cooperstown into a church. Whether it was gambling (rampant in the early 20th century), scuffing the baseballs, corking bats, amphetamines or steroids, players have been cheating like crazy forever. It's an integral, if unsavory, part of the culture. I've always had the same criteria: which players were the best performers of their particular era -- so absolutely, I'll vote for Bonds, Clemens and Sosa."
The distinction between Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens on the one hand, and Sammy Sosa on the other, also has to do with their career records. Jim Caple of ESPN.com believes Bonds and Clemens have stronger resumes than Sosa. The public echoes this distinction in a current Sports Nation poll which now shows Bonds with 44.5 percent, Clemens with 44.0 percent, and Sosa with only 25.7 percent. I agree with this assessment because Bonds and Clemens were more consistent throughout their careers, while Sosa was not particularly productive during the first four years of his career. But Jon Greenberg of ESPN Chicago thinks Sosa's "good" years were simply too good for Sosa to be delayed or passed up.
Bleacher Report writes, "Regardless of what you think of them as people, there was nothing illegal about what they did and they weren't the only ones doing it. Voting individuals need to get off their high horses and address the different baseball culture that existed in the early '90s and 2000s". And the "cheating" argument loses its punch when you consider that Gaylord Perry, who wrote a book confessing to using the spitter as his "out" pitch for several years, is ALSO in the Hall of Fame. Unless Bonds, Clemens, and Sosa either confess to using PEDs or objective evidence appears, this should not ban them from the Hall of Fame.
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
Why Barry Bonds And Roger Clemens Deserve Election To The Major League Baseball Hall Of Fame
I can think of no better excuse to re-start this blog than the latest Hall of Fame ballot which has just been published on November 28th, 2012. Included on the ballot are three prominent superstars who are suspected to have used performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) during their careers -- Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, and Sammy Sosa. For all three, it is their first time on the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA) ballot; they will each need to be named on at least 75 percent of the BBWAA ballots to qualify for induction. The outcome will be announced on January 9th, 2013.
All three have imposing credentials. Barry Bonds is the all-time home run champion with 762 and won a record seven MVP awards. Roger Clemens set a record with seven Cy Young trophies and Sammy Sosa hit 609 homers. But all three were linked to PEDs, although unlike Mark McGwire, who's also on the ballot this year for his seventh time, they've never admitted to using the drugs. I've hot-linked their names to the career stats on Baseball Reference.
Reaction to their possible induction is mixed. Much of the public seems receptive, since none of the three admitted to using PEDs. Here's a screenshot of a Sports Nation public poll currently in progress.
However, Curt Schilling, currently an ESPN analyst who's on the HOF ballot for the first time this year, said he'd never vote for them. "Here's the thing, it generally goes this way with people who are caught doing stuff: You generally never catch someone on the first go-around. These guys to some degree or another in different cases cheated and in some cases cheated for a lengthy period of time", said Schilling.
The problem is that so many players were linked to PEDs during the "Steroid Era" of the late 90s/early 00s that you would have to keep out the lion's share of superstars who played during that era. Is it their fault that the Lords of Baseball refused to recognize the problem and take corrective measures during that time? Furthermore, these players didn't take PEDs to get high; they took them to get more out of their bodies. Conscious of the fact that they were making seven-figure salaries at the time, they felt the need to get more out of the physical tools that already put them at the top of their game. Just because these superstars were making gargantuan salaries doesn't mean they didn't still take personal pride. They wanted to help their teams win -- and prolong their careers as long as possible.
Consequently, unless they suddenly admit they took PEDs, I would consider Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens to be slam dunks for admission to the HOF this year. In the case of Sammy Sosa, I'm not so enthusiastic -- while he hit 609 career home runs, he was not consistent throughout his entire career. His first four years were rather ordinary, and he aged quickly in his 30s, so Sosa should wait. I predict of the three, Roger Clemens may have the best chance to get selected this year, since he succesfully defended himself in two trials for allegedly lying to Congress (although Congress never gets put on trial for lying to us).
All three have imposing credentials. Barry Bonds is the all-time home run champion with 762 and won a record seven MVP awards. Roger Clemens set a record with seven Cy Young trophies and Sammy Sosa hit 609 homers. But all three were linked to PEDs, although unlike Mark McGwire, who's also on the ballot this year for his seventh time, they've never admitted to using the drugs. I've hot-linked their names to the career stats on Baseball Reference.
Reaction to their possible induction is mixed. Much of the public seems receptive, since none of the three admitted to using PEDs. Here's a screenshot of a Sports Nation public poll currently in progress.
However, Curt Schilling, currently an ESPN analyst who's on the HOF ballot for the first time this year, said he'd never vote for them. "Here's the thing, it generally goes this way with people who are caught doing stuff: You generally never catch someone on the first go-around. These guys to some degree or another in different cases cheated and in some cases cheated for a lengthy period of time", said Schilling.
The problem is that so many players were linked to PEDs during the "Steroid Era" of the late 90s/early 00s that you would have to keep out the lion's share of superstars who played during that era. Is it their fault that the Lords of Baseball refused to recognize the problem and take corrective measures during that time? Furthermore, these players didn't take PEDs to get high; they took them to get more out of their bodies. Conscious of the fact that they were making seven-figure salaries at the time, they felt the need to get more out of the physical tools that already put them at the top of their game. Just because these superstars were making gargantuan salaries doesn't mean they didn't still take personal pride. They wanted to help their teams win -- and prolong their careers as long as possible.
Consequently, unless they suddenly admit they took PEDs, I would consider Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens to be slam dunks for admission to the HOF this year. In the case of Sammy Sosa, I'm not so enthusiastic -- while he hit 609 career home runs, he was not consistent throughout his entire career. His first four years were rather ordinary, and he aged quickly in his 30s, so Sosa should wait. I predict of the three, Roger Clemens may have the best chance to get selected this year, since he succesfully defended himself in two trials for allegedly lying to Congress (although Congress never gets put on trial for lying to us).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)