The MLB 2009 Division Race Debate – Balance Equals Excitement in the NL Central

July 13, 2009

Read Loyal Homer’s argument that the best divisional race in MLB’s second half is the NL East, and Bleacher Fan’s argument that it’s the AL Central.



While my colleges have largely concentrated on defining the best divisional race of the MLB’s second-half of quality alone, studying the NL Central proves that both quality and quantity are possible. The division leading St. Louis Cardinals are just 2.5 games up on the second place Milwaukee Brewers. The ever-dangerous and to date disappointing Chicago Cubs – as badly as they’ve played this injury-riddled season – are just 3.5 games back of the leader. They’re tied with the Houston Astros who started poorly but have rebounded thanks to consistent offense and a good bullpen. The Cincinnati Reds have gotten some bad injury news of late, but still factor in to the race with an always aggressive Walt Jocketty serving as the team’s general manager.

Like Bleacher Fan pointed out about the AL Central, the NL Central falls victim to the same curse of balance – the division’s winner will be their lone representative in the post-season give how good the NL East has been this season. The NL Central is the only division in Major League Baseball with four teams at or above the .500 mark. The top five teams in the division are separated by just five games, with a few early season rain outs back-loading the schedule of a few teams, including the Cubs who have played the fewest games in baseball at 86.

Why is the division so close? Four of the league’s top seven best pitching staffs reside in the NL Central. And that does NOT include the Milwaukee Brewers. The Cardinals and the Cubs both have ERAs under 3.84. The Cardinals have walked the fewest opponents in the majors with only 265 while the Cubs are within striking distance of the most strike outs in the league with 662. The pitching is outstanding, and good pitching always leads to close games.

The Cardinals, Brewers, and Cubs all have winning records against their interdivision rivals, too. Unlike the AL Central, there is not one team that struggles against the division, or dominates – they’re as close to even as a division can be at this stage of the season.

Trades are exciting. The NL Central promises to be one of the most active divisions this season with trades. Because the teams are so bunched up, they must make some moves to set themselves apart.

Talk about a Hollywood script! The Cardinals routinely make a joke of the “odds” and the prognosticators, basically winning consistently with very little consistent hitting (besides that “Al” guy). The Cubs have the fourth worst on-base percentage in the NL, the second worst batting average and the second worst RBI – but still have managed to win 43 games. The Brewers have the fourth worst pitching staff in baseball, but sit 2.5 games back. The NL Central is truly defying the baseball odds this season.

Movies need stars, and the NL Central has plenty. The Cardinals have the biggest star in the game right now, first baseman Albert Pujols. The Cubs have third baseman Aramis Ramirez who just returned from injury, plus starting pitcher Carlos Zambrano. The Brewers have right fielder Ryan Braun and first baseman Prince Fielder (who is the subject of some of the best sports satire I’ve ever read).

With each team in the mood to buy at the trading deadline, it’s impossible to forecast how the next chapter in the division’s season will unfold. Unpredictability is part of what makes for a great race to the post-season. The NL Central has all of the ingredients to be the most exciting division race in baseball.

Leave a Comment » | The MLB 2009 Division Race Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sports Geek

The Publish the Steroids List Debate – The Verdict

July 8, 2009

Read Loyal Homer’s argument to release the list, and Bleacher Fan’s argument to keep the list from the public.



Steroid speculation is poison to baseball. Speculation plus the Internet? That’s speculation on, well… steroids.

Major League Baseball is in a difficult spot. They have a list of just over 100 players who agreed to be tested for performance-enhancing drugs in 2003 under the belief that the results of their tests would not be made public by MLB. The last part of that, “by MLB,” is really important. The facts indicate that the list is being leaked out… slowly… by the tried and true “unnamed sources.” The leaks are not controllable at this point, and every bit of new information is pounced on by the media and subsequently dominates the news cycle for the next several days (sorry, plstcoscr61, it will not take until 2060 for all the names to be released).

First it was New York Yankees third baseman Alex Rodriguez (who will forever be remembered as “A-Roid”). Then it was Sammy Sosa. There’s a pattern developing, and MLB commissioner Bud Selig does not like it.

But, conditions have changed since the original agreement was made. Just ask A-Roid. That’s why I must award the debate win to…

LOYAL HOMER!!!!!

The essence of this debate is should MLB publish the list. Bleacher Fan calls into question what the players have to gain from the list being published. While Bleacher Fan says they stand to gain nothing, I think the players stand to win the most. Ultimately, it’s that point that swung the verdict back toward Loyal Homer. Allow me to explain.

Current Chicago Cubs first baseman Derrek Lee is a solid MLB player (just ask Mrs. Sports Geek). But, his name was on the dreaded list that rotoinfo.com published. If I’m a lifelong Cubs fan, two things go through my mind. First, Lee nearly winning the batting title in 2005 makes more sense (even though the alleged positive test came in 2003). Lee is a lifetime .283 hitter, and it is difficult to understand how a player could, for one year, hit the cover off the ball (including a career high 46 homers and a .335 batting average) when he hit over 30 homers just two times previously (31 in 2003, 32 in 2004). See, here’s the speculation Loyal Homer is talking about. The Cubs fan is thinking, “hmmmm…” until, “Eureka!” In 2003, Lee was playing for the Florida Marlins. The SAME Florida Marlins who had Derrek Lee as their first baseman. The same Lee that delivered a two-run double in the top of the eighth inning to chase a seemingly dominant Mark Prior from the game, and start one of the greatest meltdowns/comebacks in the history of baseball (duh, nuh, nuh, nuh, nuh, nuh, nuh, nuh BART-MAN!!!). Now the Cubs fan is mad. If Lee was able to muscle that double into left center because of steroids, they should feel more cheated by that than by anything Bartman did.

The point I’m making with that story is… what if Derrek Lee didn’t cheat? What if he did NOT test positive for performance-enhancing drugs in 2003? After reading that published list, it’s easy to conclude that he must be guilty, and it changes the way he’s perceived – regardless of the truth. The list must be published to protect the countless players that never cheated – especially if speculation says they did.

Bleacher Fan is correct, the players agreed to testing only if the “information” they shared would never be publically released. However, with a weakened Donald Fehr soon vacating the head post at the MLBPA, the time of transition within the MLBPA as they transfer power is the right time for Selig to push for a new agreement with the MLBPA that allows for the release of the list. This is not breaking the law – it’s adjusting the law to a new environment.

While on the surface it seems that Selig would be undertaking a Herculean task here, he can lead the charge to do something baseball should have done a long time ago with steroids – take time to explain to the players why they MUST disclose those who are guilty. I genuinely understand the “Fraternal Order of Major League Players,” but in the case of the steroids era, that inherent secrecy is alienating fans. At a time when MLB is doing a better job of creating a transparent environment (e.g. MLB Network… which is outstanding, by the way), there is a real opportunity to truly begin healing the steroids era, and baseball must jump at the chance. Selig should burn all of the political capital he has left to make it happen.

If he can pull off the disclosure of this list, no fans will question other names that may or may not be on a list, no more records and batting averages will be called into question, and there is the opportunity for bold action that will bring final closure on the poisonous steroids era in baseball. Selig can define his legacy by being the commissioner that cleaned up baseball. Right now, he’s merely the commissioner that SAID he wants to clean up baseball, but hasn’t done a whole lot about it.

3 Comments | The Publish the Steroids List Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sports Geek

The 16-Year-Old Baseball Player Debate – Age Is a State of Mind

June 25, 2009

Read the debate intro and Bleacher Fan’s opinions.



Age is not a particularly interesting subject. Anyone can get old. All you have to do is live long enough. – Groucho Marx

Sports Geek loves these types of debates because Sports Geek loves history and research. The fact that Bryce Harper has made the decision to enter the MLB draft in 2010 is no surprise. Baseball players, regardless of era, get signed or drafted very early and develop, as Mr. Doots suggested in the comments. Let’s review the history (are you as excited as I am?).

The youngest player to ever make their major league debut is a matter of some dispute. Some believe that it is pitcher Fred Chapman who was born November 24, 1872, and made his professional baseball debut with the Philadelphia Athletics of the American Association League on July 22, 1887 – at the tender age of 14. Now THAT’s young. Not only was it young, it was the only game he pitched, and probably why some do not recognize him as the youngest professional baseball player ever.

Others give that distinction to southpaw pitcher Joe Nuxhall. Nuxhall, born in Hamilton, Ohio in 1928, made his professional debut with the local club, the 1944 Cincinnati Reds, where he pitched 2/3 of an inning, walked five batters and allowed five earned runs on just two hits. He was 15-years-old. Apparently the experience was so devastating he gave up baseball for eight year, returning to the Reds in 1952 as a more mature pitcher where he went 1-4, but had a much improved ERA of 3.22. He played 14 more seasons after that, earning an All-Star appearance twice, once in 1955 (though he only won 17 games in 55 appearances that year) and again in 1956.

Now, you may be saying, “Sports Geek, don’t be dense – I’m sure they would’ve let a 5-year-old play back in the day if they could swing a bat.” That may be true. Those examples prove precedent for early major league debuts. However Loyal Homer has only questioned a young player being signed. So, let’s fast-forward an era or two.

For modern era players, I can give two quick examples. Former Chicago Cubs hot center field prospect Felix Pie was signed out of the Dominican Republic in 2001 when was, yep, you guessed it – 16! After a few highly anticipated turns in the minor league system and a gruesome injury (guys, don’t click… don’t do it, you’ll cringe) he was finally traded to the Baltimore Orioles.

The second example is current Chicago Cub, and former Pittsburgh Pirate prospect, third baseman Aramis Ramirez. He signed with the Pirates at 16. Of course, what 16-year-old would turn down $170,000? Ramierz wasn’t even drafted, he was signed as an amateur free agent.

This brings us to young Mr. Harper. If scouts and coaches are telling him he has a legitimate shot to be a fairly high draft pick, why not do what he can to put himself in a position to make some money and maximize his years of earning potential? If I am a MLB general manager, I absolutely take a chance on a kid with this much raw talent. Drafting or signing players in MLB is all about raw talent and potential. Harper likely has the most raw talent and potential in the draft, so he’s perfect high draft choice. It’s a no-brainer.

There is enormous precedent for this move. Young players get signed every day. In fact, I don’t understand why this story has received so much media attention. Harper is one in a long, long line of promising youngsters that are making their run at playing big league baseball. But, buyer beware. Just because a kid has raw talent, doesn’t mean it’s a limitless potential. In the end, I hope things work out for Harper. It’s a gutsy move. I respect gutsy moves.

Leave a Comment » | The 16-Year-Old Baseball Player Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sports Geek

The Sign Stealing Debate – It’s Stealing, People!!!

June 17, 2009

Read the debate intro and Bleacher Fan’s opinion.



Sign stealing has been going on since the early days of baseball. It happened yesterday. It happened today. Guess what? It’ll probably happen tomorrow.

There are many unwritten rules in baseball. Some that come to mind are as follows:

  • Never steal a base late in a game that’s out of hand. This happens occasionally, and it really ticks me off when it does.
  • Do not show up a pitcher after hitting a home run. This means no trotting or no excessive flipping of the bat. This rule applies to people like Atlanta Braves shortstop Yunel Escobar. It also applied to former Chicago Cubs right fielder Sammy Sosa (I was hoping we’d heard the last of him) and Seattle Mariners second baseman Bret Boone, when they were active.
  • Never try to break up a no hitter late in a game by bunting. The last time I remember this happening was in 2001 when Curt Schilling was pitching against San Diego while still with the Arizona Diamondbacks.

Those are three of my favorites. If a player pulls any of those tricks against a team I’m managing, payback is forthcoming. Your best hitter might as well go ahead and put some extra padding on, because he’s about to get a two-seam fastball drilled right into his ribs.

Here’s another unwritten rule to add:

  • Never steal signs!

The scenario Sports Geek touched on in the debate intro is interesting.

Let’s break down “sign-stealing.” More importantly, let’s break down the word “steal.”

According to Webster, “steal” means “to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right, especially secretly or by force.”

In this particular situation, A-Roid (sp??) is taking “property” (baseball game information via “signs”) away from the opposing team. I can guarantee you the opposing team didn’t give A-Roid (sp??) permission to steal signs!

What is Major League Baseball, and our good buddy Commissioner Bud Selig, going to do about it? Are they going to turn a blind eye like the NCAA does (see yesterday’s debate)?

When there is blatant sign stealing going on, MLB should do something about it. At the very least, a fine should be levied against the parties involved for a first offender. If it continues, perhaps a suspension will clean things up really quickly.

Selig is all about trying to clean up the game and get baseball through the steroid era. If you are going to attempt to fix that problem, you might as well address sign stealing, too. Technology is more prevalent in baseball than ever before. Batters actually go into the clubhouse and look at video of their previous at bat in the middle of the game. (Is this perhaps another opportunity to steal signs? Hmmmm…)

Step up, Major League Baseball, and do something!

3 Comments | The Sign Stealing Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The Jake Peavy Debate – The Verdict Is In

May 28, 2009

I want to begin with a big thank you to everyone who has visited us during our kickoff debate, and to everyone who added their comments, either directly on the site, or on our Twitter feed!

I also want to say thank you to Sports Geek and Loyal Homer for ensuring our inaugural debate was one worth checking out (and one worthy of being the first debate)!

And now, the Verdict is in.

Allow me to be the first to congratulate the winner of the inaugural Sports Debate…

SPORTS GEEK!!!

To recap, Jake Peavy recently made a decision to block a trade that would send him from San Diego over to the American League with the Chicago White Sox. While he has publicly given some explanation behind his decision, many people are still questioning what his real motivation was, and also whether or not he made the right choice.

Both sides made very convincing arguments. Loyal Homer, arguing that Peavy made the wrong choice, started the debate off strong when he pointed out that Peavy had expressed a desire to play for a contender, and then posed his position that the Padres were certainly not in a position of contention. Loyal Homer raised valid points regarding the White Sox and the fact that they have a legitimate opportunity to compete for the AL Central Title. He criticized Peavy for then passing on opportunities to play in Atlanta and Chicago for both the Cubs and the White Sox. Ultimately, he said Peavy is a Prima Donna, and that he would regret his decision to remain in San Diego.

In response, Sports Geek, arguing that Peavy made the right decision, called into question the White Sox ability to really compete for the World Series. His notes on some recent injuries, as well as some pitching and hitting problems for the ChiSox raised some questions about whether or not Chicago really would be a good place for Jake to call home. In his final comments, Sports Geek concluded by considering Peavy’s trade value, and a lack of any compelling reason for him to go to Chicago.

There was one more point raised, though, which I felt really cut to the heart of this debate, and ultimately which tipped the scales in favor of the Sports Geek. That was the point he raised regarding the present AND FUTURE trade value of Jake Peavy. With 10 weeks remaining until the trade deadline, Peavy still has plenty of time to separate the contenders from the pretenders. While the White Sox may be a contender right now, a lot can happen over a 10-week period.

That point, raised by Sports Geek during his initial comments, ultimately carried the day, and earned him the first victory in TSD! Congratulations Sports Geek!

WHILE THE FINAL VERDICT IS IN, THE DEBATE DOESN’T HAVE TO END…

Visit our Overtime blog for follow-up commentary by our contributors. See their reactions to the judge’s verdict, and weigh in yourself with more thoughts on the Peavy Trade, as well as your own reactions to the judge’s decision.

Once again, I want to thank you all for making our launch a successful one. Make sure to stop by later today and find out what our next debate will be! Also, don’t forget to subscribe to TSD’s RSS feed (it’s free), and make sure to follow us on Twitter!

2 Comments | The Jake Peavy Debate May 09 | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

Next Entries »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.