The Man Responds

Joe Posnanski took the time to address my previous post about A-Rod & McGwire. Like everything else he writes, it's worth reading.

I Know That Face: McGwire, A-Rod and Posnanski

I didn't really want to talk about this subject, but for some odd reason, I've been thinking a lot about Mark McGwire over the past two days. The reason of course is obvious, but it's odd because I've never really cared much about McGwire before Monday. When you say "baseball" and "1998" the first thing that comes to mind is the unstoppable version of the Yankees that won 114 games and the World Series. I never really cared that Big Mac took steroids, but I still consider the single season home run record to be 61 (although Maris' 1961 campaign obviously comes with its own set of caveats). Basically, I was fairly indifferent about the guy and still am about steroid use in general.

But then I read the part of his statement where he said "wished he never played during the steroid era" and quickly realized this wasn't going to be an actual apology. Then I watched the interview with Bob Costas on Monday night and listened to McGwire refuse to acknowledge that there might be some connection between him taking steroids and hitting lots of home runs and I grew more disenchanted. My first mistake was expecting a real apology in the first place. My second mistake was watching the interview.

At that point I was ensnared in the story. I read reaction after reaction yesterday, some echoing the disapproval Tom Verducci and Ken Rosenthal showed on the MLB Network after the interview and some questioning why McGwire's apology wasn't good enough for us. Even those who claimed not to care were adamant in their apathy.

While no one was particularly surprised by McGwire's admission, the story still got huge and reached a point of ridiculous oversaturation. Basically everyone with a voice in the baseball media offered their opinion and there were responses to the interview and also retorts to those responses.

Well, here I am with a rebuttal to a retort to the responses. When you are a media bottom feeder like myself and you wait 36 hours to give your opinion on a story like this, all that's left is the backwash of the backlash. So here goes nothing...

If you don't read Joe Posnanski's blog, you are truly missing out. If there was a sports writers draft tomorrow, he would be snatched up with the first pick. He weaves together disparate topics with ease and makes seemingly uninteresting things worth reading about. His posts are long and nuanced and are meant to be read in full, but I'm going to blockquote him here (and take him out of context) to make a point.

From his reaction to the McGwire interview (or more accurately, his reaction to other's reactions):

I didn't agree with or even follow everything McGwire said, but I never thought that was the point. I never thought apologizing was an Olympic sport with stoned-faced people judging how straight his toes were pointed and if he made too big a splash. McGwire is not a public speaker. He's not a philosopher. He's not a politician. He is not even an especially open person. He is a guy who dedicated his life to hitting baseballs hard. Expecting him to become Hamlet doesn't seem fair.

This is a valid viewpoint. I happen to disagree, but two people can watch the same lengthy interview and come away with completely different perceptions of what just took place. There's a lot of wiggle room in 54 minutes of two-way conversation.

But look at Posnanski's reaction to A-Rod's interview with Peter Gammons last year:

I thought Alex Rodriguez’s ”apology“ was one of the most absurd shams of recent memory. I thought it was so pathetic that, for the first time, that ”A-Fraud“ moniker finally made some sense to me. As a baseball fan, I wasn’t mad at A-Rod when the steroid story broke. As a baseball fan, I was furious at A-Rod when he and his handlers put together this infomercial apology.

To me that sounds like Joe judging A-Rod's apology, something that "wasn't the point" when it was McGwire's turn in the hot seat. Again, there is a lot of room for interpretation and there are significant differences between the two situations and subsequent interviews (namely the interviewer), but it's hard to reconcile those two statements.

Both of these guys had handlers and given the attention that they were bound to garner by admitting to using steroids, they should have. The biggest difference was that McGwire's team had a month to orchestrate his PR offensive while A-Rod found out that he was going to have to face the music three days prior while he was running on a treadmill and confronted by Selena Roberts.

Poz goes on to suggest (about A-Rod):

That this is a PR campaign ordered up by a very rich man who got caught and the only goal was to admit as little as humanly possible and make excuses for the little he does admit.

McGwire didn't get caught, but the only reason that he's admitting this now is that he wants to be the hitting coach for the Cardinals and he knows he has to pay his pound of flesh to the media and get this out of the way now. But his PR campaign was far more calculated than A-Rod's was and similarly unbelievable.

If you're Mark McGwire, you don't pay the big bucks to a "crisis-communications company" to tell the whole truth. You hire them to conveniently confine your steroid usage to the smallest believable window, and claim you used them only to recover from injuries. You flatly deny Jose Canseco's account because he still doesn't have any real credibility despite the fact that most of the stuff he said was true. You say that you only used steroids in "very, very low dosage". You don't acknowledge that they might have made you a superhuman home run machine, because that would be cheating, you see? You just took them to get back to where you were. Heck, talk about the "backspin" you put on the ball and act like you unlocked some key to hitting. You're going to be a hitting coach after all!

When you hire a crisis-communications company, they feed you lines like "walking M*A*S*H unit" that you repeat over and over again. They find a way to spin your bungled appearance in front of congress in 2005 so it looks like it wasn't your fault. They make sure you don't incriminate your former coach and future boss by saying he had knowledge of your steroid use. They remind you to say that you "wish you never played in the steroid era". Because like A-Rod being naive and trying to live up to the expectations of a giant contract in Texas, you were a victim of circumstance - an injury-plagued slugger who just happened to play in the steroid era.

I don't like being lied to. I don't appreciate the fact that, not only does Mark McGwire think that he was a better home run hitter than Babe Ruth because of his "God-given ability", but that he is also smarter than everyone else and thinks he can pass off a partial admission because he hired a company to calculate exactly how much he had to admit.

The problem is that a story gets this big, and the mainstream media reaction becomes the villian. Everyone needs a take and no one wants to hear you repeat what Tom Verducci said 10 seconds after the interview concluded.

The one common thread between Posnanski's take on McGwire and A-Rod is that he says that he's shocked that he disagrees with everyone's else's reaction in both. I don't find that surprising at all. I think the best writers make a living on the opposite end of the spectrum (our pal Craig Calcaterra comes to mind). Not to say that they don't believe their own opinions, but the guys I most enjoy reading typically come down diametrically opposed to the majority reaction when a story like this breaks. They are good at finding something about conventional wisdom to disagree with and that makes their opinion interesting to read.

Well this time, I think the original consensus was right. I think McGwire's "admission" was, in many ways, just as bad as A-Rod's. I'm not willing to believe that he really took steroids just to get healthy and I think deep down he knows that they made him better.

If you grant that the truth lies between what Jose Canseco said and what McGwire did, well McGwire's lying because he said there was "absolutely no truth to that whatsoever". And what good is an apology if you're not going to tell the truth? Besides, I wasn't asking for an apology anyway. McGwire did this for himself. Which shouldn't be a surprise, because if he was doing it for everyone else, it would have happened years ago.

Today In Meaningless Clichés

To be fair, Anthony McCarron wrote this yesterday, but that's not going to stop me from making fun of him for it this morning, Fackers:

They are looking for a right-handed hitter. Sounds like Johnny Damon hasn’t got a shot unless he’s willing to play on the seriously cheap, which isn't likely to happen. So who do you like? Reed Johnson? Jerry Hairston, Jr.? Xavier Nady?

Me, I think they need to add someone, preferably a get-the-uniform-dirty type. But I also think they ought to give Brett Gardner a real chance.

Me, I'd like a keeps-his-uniform-clean-so-he-doesn't-have-to-wash-it-very-often type. Saves money for the team, to say nothing of the benefits for the environment, you know?

I know this "dirty uniform" tag gets tossed around a lot, but what does it actually mean? Someone who steals bases? A guy who is willing to slide to catch the ball? Are extra points awarded for grass stains? (They are harder to remove after all...)

Is it someone who sits Indian-style in the on-deck circle and makes fucking sand castles? Or is it just another meaningless moniker for a scrappy, gritty, feisty, battling, pugnacious, rough-and-tumble bench grunt who plays with a chip on his shoulder (otherwise known as someone who isn't good enough to land a starting job somewhere else)?

McCarron doesn't elaborate on what he means by this at all. He doesn't even offer up even one example of a uniform dirtier that the Yankees could sign. In fact, he sort of implies that Brett Gardner isn't sufficient in his garb grubbying, thus necessitating the acquisition of another shirt stainer.

Is this filthy enough for you, Anthony? Does Reed Johnson meet your standards of uncleanliness?

The Yankes Are Serious About This Budget Thing

Joel Sherman writes on his blog today that the Yankees only have $2M remaining to spend on a left fielder and as a way of making that point, unveils this tidbit:

Hal Steinbrenner, after all, has shown a much greater willingness to hold to some financial guidelines than his father, George, did. For example, the Post has learned, the Yanks had a completed trade last July with Milwaukee for Mike Cameron, pending ownership’s blessing to take on the money. But Hal Steinbrenner refused to add the approximately $5.5 million in salary and luxury tax it would have cost for the rest of the season, so the deal was scrapped.

Sherman leaves out some important details, namely who would have been exchanged for Cameron and when in July this deal almost took place. It was rumored that the Yankees were about to trade Melky Cabrera to the Brewers for Cameron last December, so it's possible that he would have been included in the deal again. Brett Gardner broke his thumb in July 25th, so the Yanks could have tried to orchestrate a trade in that small window before the July 31st deadline, in which case it would be more likely that other players would have been sent to the Brewers instead of Melky.

With a total salary of $10M and $125,000 bonuses kicking in at 425, 475, 525 & 575 plate appearances Cameron wasn't exactly a bargain last year, but that prorated amount would have only been about 2.7% of the Yankees payroll. It was a proverbial drop in the bucket at that point. Clearly it wasn't a necessary addition as the Yanks got all they needed out of centerfield in 2009, but it takes a lot of discipline as an owner to be convinced of that at the time.

Sherman goes on to say that the Yankees are interested in Xavier Nady and Reed Johnson but that the former might be slightly out of their price range. This means that signing Jerry Hairston, Jr. would all but exhaust their budget and unless Johnny Damon wants to come back on a bargain-basement-one-time-only-red-tag-special, he's obviously out too. Your move, Reed Johnson.

The Case For Raines

Good morning Fackers. For the most part, the backlash over last week's Hall of Fame voting results has cooled down and everyone has moved on to extracting their pound of flesh from Mark McGwire. But in running down the voting results last week, I made mention that the continued exclusion of Tim Raines and his overall poor showing in the results is the gravest injustice in the ballots. I further stated that the reasons why warranted its own post. This is that post.

Raines, like Bert Blyleven, has become something of rallying cause for the sabermetric community, as he was a tremendously valuable player, for a number of years, whose greatness isn't readily evident when measured by traditional metrics. I think this might be working against Raines. As far as we've come in our understanding of the game, there are still those amongst the voting ranks who have their heads buried in the sand, who are steadfastly against sabermetrics, the blogging community, and anything else that isn't a crusty old remnant of whenever they first cut their teeth in sports writing.

So rather than lay out a bunch of statistical analysis supporting Raines' cause - something that's been done far more eloquently by the likes of Joe Posnanski, Rob Neyer, Jonah Keri, and raines30.com - I'll try to put things in more of a general framework.

Simply put, Tim Raines, with the exception of Rickey Henderson, is the greatest leadoff hitter of all time. He was a machine at getting on base, he was historically successful at stealing bases (both in terms of quantity and success rate), and he scored runs by the boatload. Granted, if Raines was more of a power threat he would have been a three hitter rather than a leadoff hitter. But, batting leadoff is arguably the most important position in the batting order, as it will see the most plate appearances over the course of the season. And Raines' exceptional ability to avoid making outs made him extremely valuable in that role. Furthermore, Raines was not without power. While his home run totals are pedestrian at best, he spent his prime in Olympic Stadium, a very pitcher friendly park. Even so, Raines accumulated lots of doubles and triples - not to mention all the extra bases he stole - and his slugging percentage routinely outpaced the league average.

It's also very important to consider context in which Raines accomplished all of this. Baseball in the 1980s was markedly different than the game we watch today. Cookie-cutter astroturf ballparks permeated the game - particularly in Raines' National League. Power was down - the 49 home runs hit in 1987 both by recent electee Andre Dawson and recent confessor Mark McGwire were the most in baseball between George Foster's 52 in 1977 and Albert Belle's 50 in 1995 Cecil Fielder's 51 in 1990.

The game was built upon speed. Billy Martin's Oakland A's and Whitey Herzog's St. Louis Cardinals attempted steals at will. Herzog's teams, built on speed and defense, were arguably the team of decade, raking in four division titles, three pennants, and a World Series. The style of play permeated the game and players - Raines, Rickey Henderson, Vince Coleman, Willie McGee, Ozzie Smith - ran with reckless abandon.

And that was the problem with that style of play: it was reckless. Teams placed such a premium on speed that human out machines like Alfredo Griffin, Juan Samuel, and Mookie Wilson were given thousands of wasteful plate appearances in the leadoff spot strictly because they were fast. Traces of this philosophy still remain, as Dusty Baker's Reds have spent the last two years getting abyssmal OBP from the leadoff spot just because Corey Patterson and Willie Taveras are fast. When these players did manage to reach base, many of them were caught stealing so frequently that the bushels of stolen bases they accumulated were of little to no value thanks to all the extra outs they cost their teams. But with the right personnel, with the likes of Tim Raines getting on base at a .390 clip and swiping seventy plus bases a year at a jaw dropping 87% success rate, it was a successful and exciting style of play. The problem was, with the exception of Raines' Expos and Henderson's A's and Yankees, teams didn't have the right personnel to make that style of play work.

Baseball, as a game, has changed innumerable times in its 130+ year history. Our understanding of that game has changed and evolved over that time as well. The early Hall of Fame voters were able to understand that the players of the Deadball Era helped their teams win in different ways than the sluggers of the Ruth era. We understand now that top offensive contributions made in the mid to late sixties appear paltry compared to numbers that came before and after, but are no less outstanding when considering the context of the game at the time. We are starting to understand more and more the value of positional adjustments, and how a certain level of offensive production from a player capable of fielding a premium defensive position could be offer more value than a greater level of offensive production from a less important defensive position.

All of these factors come into play when considering Raines' case. Batting leadoff may not be the glamour batting position that the three or four spots are, but it's an extremely important spot. And virtually no one was better at batting in that spot than Tim Raines. Furthermore, he did his damage in an era where the game was placing more focus on the leadoff spot than it ever had before. With any luck, the BBWAA will realize this at some point in the next twelve years.

Dissecting The DH Signings

So far this offseason, free-swinging goat roaster Vladimir Guerrero, World Series Hero and spousal sketch artist Hideki Matsui, and injury-prone on-base messiah Nick Johnson have all been signed as DHs for elite offensive teams.

According to the Dallas News Vlad's deal is for $5M with incentives making comparable to the $5.5M deal Johnson got from the Yankees and the $6M one Matsui received from the Angels. Johnson's contract includes bonuses for every 25 plate appearances over 400 and mutual option or buyout for 2011, giving it the largest possible value of the three. But for this coming year, the values are likely to be quite similar.

While Johnson is more than 5 years younger than either Matsui or Guerrero, he carries similar risk of injury, having spent far more than his fair share of time on the DL over the course of his career. Johnson may be capable of playing first base and Matsui may want to play the outfield, but all three figure to DH almost exclusively in 2010.

Offensively, each has a unique profile. By getting on base at a .400 clip, Johnson offers something much different than either of the other two aging sluggers, but when healthy each provides similar overall value to a lineup.

The biggest difference between Matsui and Guerrero is that Matsui is coming off one of the best years of his career (not to mention the World Series MVP), while Vlad just completed one of his worst, both in terms of games played and at bat for at bat production. Johnson, meanwhile, came to the plate 574 times, the second most in his career and got on base quite often, but his slugging percentage was the lowest of the three.

However, the Yankees would gladly trade points in SLG for OBP considering he's going to be hitting in front of Mark Teixeira and Alex Rodriguez. Matsui and Guerrero are going to hit more towards the middle of the order and their higher slugging percentages will be more useful in driving in runs. In terms of a fit for the line up, it seems that Johnson and the Yankees are a perfect match.

So between Matsui and Guerrero, who figures to provide more value for their team next year?

The chart below shows Vlad's numbers since he came to Anaheim back in 2004 (darker numbers are better).

While it hasn't been an even decline across the board, it's easy to see that he's fallen a long way in every category listed above in the last six years. Conversely, Matsui's 2009 line (.274/.367/.509) was very similar to his career marks (.292/.370/.482) with the exception of his batting average being slightly lower and his slugging percentage slightly higher. While Guerrero is still (supposedly) younger than Matsui and had a higher, longer career peak, it seems as though Vlad is further into his decline phase.

Plate discipline has a way insulating a batter from the effects of aging and that is one category Matsui owns Vlad in. Vlad walked in only 4.7% of his plate appearances last year, the lowest of his career, while Matsui walked in 12.3%, sightly above his career average.

Was luck a factor? Matsui had a BABIP of .275, which was .23 lower than his career mark. Guerrero was down slightly to .314 from his mean of .322. Vlad hit more fly balls in 2009 than in previous years, particularly infield fly balls. His line drive percentage was actually up last year, but he saw a dive in his HR/FB rate (-4.6%). Matsui had the same underlying factors ( increases in FB, IFFB, LD%), but his HR/FB rate nearly doubled to 17.9%. You can chalk some of the difference up to the New Yankee Stadium, but it appears he was fortunate with his results as well.

In 2010, Matsui will be moving to a less favorable hitter's park while Vlad will be moving to a more favorable one. As Jack Moore points out over at FanGraphs today, Vlad has excellent numbers at the Ballpark in Arlington, but "the data from the last few years in Anaheim far outweighs the fact that he’s killed the Rangers at home over the last six."

If I were a GM, I would be worried about Vlad's slow downward spiral over the past couple of years. While he had a higher, more sustained peak than Matsui, he seems to be more susceptible to the aging process than Godzilla. His bat speed has already started to leave him and the results have not been good. This isn't to say that Matsui is a sure bet either with his balky knees and all, but his patient approach at the plate and solid production last year seem to make him a better value in 2010.

Fack Youk Field Trip: Frozen Fenway

Friday I took a field trip up to the heart of enemy territory. The ball park which the Yankees organization held the mortgage on for several years was hosting its final two hockey games of the winter, with a Hockey East doubleheader. My alma mater, Boston College, faced their arch rivals, Boston University in the nightcap.

As our friend 'Duk from Big League Stew told hockey blog Puck Daddy over the weekend, college hockey is one of America's best kept sporting secrets. It doesn't get much attention in the NYC metro area, or even in my home state of Connecticut, but it's pretty big stuff in the rest of New England, as well as the Midwest and the Great Plains. BC hockey was one of my favorite parts of my collegiate experience (1 National Championship, 3 Frozen Fours, a Beanpot title, and 2 Hockey East tournament championships and regular season championships). So the chance to see the Eagles take on the hated Terriers in an outdoor game was pretty a cool experience.

Pre game ceremonies featured former Major Leaguers and current Boston-area men's league hockey players Richie Hebner, John Tudor, and former Yankee Bill Monbouquette. Honorary captains for BU included Miracle on Ice hero Mike Eruzione, former Ranger Tony Amonte, and Travis Roy. Honorary captains for BC were Marty McInnis, Craig Janney, and former Ranger Brian Leetch.

Despite light snow and frigid temperatures (around 10 degrees with the wind), I had consumed enough anti-freeze at Game On prior to the game to keep me warm. Our seats in the centerfield bleachers offered a decent enough vantage point of the ice, better than those in field boxes whose views were obscured by the boards.

Both teams featured special sweaters for the event. BC rolled out a special gold jersey, featuring a green stripe (to represent the Green Monster) between the standard maroon stripes and baseball diamond logo above the numbers on the back. BU replaced their standard lettering with the Red Sox font and featured a hockey skate version of the Red Sox hanging socks logo on the shoulders.

Unfortunately for me, there wasn't much to celebrate in the game. BU jumped out to a 3-0 lead just more than halfway through the game. BC got a power play goal late in the second to get on the board, and then scored a shorthanded goal with just over 12 minutes to play to cut the deficit to one. That would be it for scoring on the night though, as BC went just 1 for 8 on the power play and wound up losing 3-2. Despite the victory, BU is just sixth in Hockey East, while BC is in third - five points off the pace and six points ahead of their rivals.

Somewhere in the crowd was the fan antithesis of me. You may have won this round buddy; we'll see what happens at the Beanpot next month. In the meantime I'll try to remain content with the World Series championship.

While it's looking increasingly less likely that Yankee Stadium will host a hockey game next year, or perhaps any time in the next three years, they could learn a lesson from the way Fenway handled their Winter Classic experience. Typical of the Henry ownership group, they squeezed every penny they could out of their three weeks with a rink. In addition to the Winter Classic and the Frozen Fenway doubleheader, they hosted two public skates for Boston residents, a prep school game between Taft and Avon Old Farms, a BC-BU alumni game, and reportedly rented out the ice, at a very lucrative rate, for local teams to use. Despite a shortage of area D-I collegiate squads, I hope the Yankees can manage to do something similar if and when they get to host some hockey games.

(Sweater and fan photos courtesy of Puck Daddy)

Would Hairston Be "Perfect" For The Yankees?

As mentioned earlier this morning, the Yankees are rumored to be "in serious talks" to bring back Jerry Hairston, Jr. Rob Neyer contends that he would be the "perfect Yankee", but I'm not so sure.

The source of that rumor was a tweet by ESPN's Chris Singleton, who added that the Yankees would use the 33 year old utility man to "spell Jeter and Rodriguez and platoon in left possibly". Hairston is capable of playing every position 3-9, but the problem is that he's not particularly well-suited to any of the three tasks Singleton listed.

Although he's right handed, Hairston doesn't make much sense as a platoon partner for Brett Gardner. In his career against left handers, Hairston has put up a weak line of .264/.323/.386, which is better than Gardner but much worse than Reed Johnson (.313/.378/.463) who is also available. Hairston does figure to be an asset defensively, but just how much of one is largely up to your imagination. His 37.7 UZR/150 in LF is simply too good to be true considering it's based on only 132 games and 594 innings there.

Hairston has similar sample size issues with his defense on the left side of the infield, but not the same encouraging results. He's started only 46 games at 3B (40 of them last year) and made 10 errors in that time. Shortstop is a relatively new position to him as well, having logged only 533 career innings there with almost all of them coming in the last two years. The initial numbers say his range isn't great at either position.

Additionally, the Yankees already have four utility infielders on the 40 man roster - Ramiro Pena, Eduardo Nunez, Kevin Russo & Reegie Corona. Hairston figures to contribute more offensively than any of them, but Pena in particular is a far superior defender at both short and third.

Joe from River Ave. Blues explained how Hairston, acting as a back up infielder and outfielder, would free up a spot on the bench. Since the Yankees 12 man pitching staff affords room for only four extra position players, flexibility is at a premium. But production is the end goal, not flexibility.

While Hairston could play a number of positions, he doesn't excel at any of them - at least not in the capacity the Yankees would utilize him. The upshot is that he might save a roster spot by performing multiple functions for the Yanks, but that would only be useful if they could fill that spot with a player who can offer something that Hairston can't. Are the Yanks willing to spend a couple million dollars on a guy who is a bridge to signing another bench player? Because that's the only way it would make sense to bring him back.

Winter Weekend Roundup

Good morning Fackers. With the exception of the overtime shootout between the Packers and Cardinals last night (which was the highest scoring playoff game in NFL history) there wasn't much in the way of interesting football to watch this weekend. Three of the games featured leads of two touchdowns or more during the first half and only one ended up with a final score within 10 points. Joe picked two of the four games correctly, which was a whole lot better than Bill Simmons, who went 0-4.

Football maybe have disappointed, but the Hot Stove kept burning all weekend long, offering up some warmth during a very cold weekend along the East Coast.

First, from the Yankees:

• Much to the chagrin of staffers at the NY Daily News, countless teenage girls and (reportedly) Tim McCarver, the Post believes that they have uncovered the date of Derek Jeter and Minka Kelly's wedding - this coming November 5th, two days after Game 7 of the 2010 World Series. Mark Melancon actually got married over the weekend, no one really cares about that.
  
  
• The Yankees are rumored to be in "serious talks" with Jerry Hairston, Jr. Neyer likes it as does Joe from RAB, each citing the value of versatility.
  

• Johnny Damon is still in search of a job, with the Braves one of a "handful of teams" Damon believes he "could win" with. The Yankees tried to tell Damon that this is how the market would play out, but unfortunately for him Scott Boras was more concerned finding a place for Matt Holliday. Via River Ave. Blues, Aubrey Huff signed with San Francisco, further limiting Damon's options.

And around the league:

• Although they had been pursing Aroldis Chapman "like crazy", the first news of the Reds' involvement came Sunday in the form of a tweet from Jeff Passan of Yahoo. There were some good jokes involving Dusty Baker and/or communism to be made, but they were snatched up pretty quickly. Here's a nice, if slightly outdated, video report on the Cuban lefty.
  
  Reds beat reporter John Fay says that the deal is for $25M over 5 years with an option for the 6th year. However, Chapman will be paid over a period of 10 years and his 2010 salary will only be in the neighborhood of $1M.
  
  Our buddy Craig thinks this is a good risk for the Reds at this point, adding another high upside arm to a young rotation. The A's were reportedly the next highest bidder.

• The Rangers signed Vlad Guererro for $5M plus incentives.

• Daisuke Matsuzaka told a paper in Japan that he hurt his thigh before the World Baseball Classic last year, but didn't bother to inform the Red Sox. Fans might see this as good news since it could explain some of his difficulties last season, but I can't imagine the organization is too pleased.

• Ed Wade continues to do his best to be included in "The Contest".

• Murray Chass lectured bloggers for making grammatical mistakes and, in accordance with Muprhy's Law, made some of his own in the process.

Wild Card Weekend

Last year before Fack Youk went approximately 99% Bronx-centric, a relatively large amount of our coverage was geared towards the NFL Playoffs. This post, linked to by Deadspin and shamelessly sampled without attribution by Kissing Suzy Kolber (#22), was our first big hit.

Well, the 2010 NFL Playoffs are here. Despite the fact that second favorite team of the blog, the Giants, aren't in the Tournament of Twelve, there are certainly some Jets and Pats fans out there at the very least. Even if you don't follow any of the teams partaking in the postseason, the NFL Playoffs are undoubtedly the greatest four weekends in sports. They also mark the last significant sporting events until Pitchers and Catchers report to George M. Steinbrenner Field in Tampa, Florida on February 17, 2010.

Here is my take on the 2010 Wild Card Weekend featuring three Week 17 "rematches" (the 10th, 11th and 12th times this has happened since 1990 - previously, one team won both games four times and the teams split five times). Let's see if watching 10 games a weekend for 17 weeks via NFL Sunday Ticket actually did anything for me:

New York Jets (+3), at Cincinnati Bengals, Saturday 4:30 EST, NBC.

Some say that the Jets "backed in" by virtue of Jim Caldwell and Bill Polian being smart and realizing that Super Bowl championships and not perfect (or 18-1) seasons are what you play for. Well, sometimes it's better to be lucky than good. This first game of Wild Card Weekend is also the first Week 17 rematch - when the 9-7 Jets trounced the Bengals 37-0. Interestingly enough, the 2001 Jets beat the Raiders in Week 17 but lost to the Raiders in the Wild Card game (the Raiders subsequently lost to the Patriots in the infamous Tuck Rule game).

Back to Week 17, the Jets were playing for their proverbial playoff lives and the Bengals weren't playing for anything, sat Cedric Benson and called 11 total pass plays for Carson Palmer. The pumped-up Jets relied upon their NFL-leading rushing attack which overpowered the 7th ranked Cincy run defense.

How the Jets Can Win: Keep it on the ground and limit the throws of rookie Mark Sanchez, Palmer's fellow USC alum. Rookie QBs + Playoffs = Golf. Darrelle Revis also needs to shut down Ochocinco like he did in Week 17.

How the Bengals Can Win: On offense, the Bengals need to be able to sneak a few big plays past the NFL leading Jets pass defense. On defense, they will have to play like the defense that ranked 7th in the NFL against the run.

Injury Notes: Chad Ochocinco injured his knee in pregame warmups but it appears that he will play. Bengals DT Pat Sims suffered a broken forearm on Sunday and was placed on IR, but fellow DT Domata Peko is expected to be back from knee surgery, bolstering the Bengals Run D that gave up 257 Yards to the Jets.

Random: I expect many Jets fans to call the Bengals Jerk Line at 513-381-JERK (5375).

My Prediction: Given that the Jets ranked 8th against the run and 1st against the pass, and that the Bengals finished 7th and 6th in those respective categories, I expect this be one hell of a low-scoring affair. I say that the Jets prevail with a Thomas Jones score and a couple of FGs from Jay Feely.

Jets: 13
Bengals: 10

Philadelphia Eagles (+4) at Dallas Cowboys, Saturday 8:00 EST, NBC:

This is also a rematch of the Week 17 game in Dallas in which Tony Romo and the Cowboys completed the exorcism of their December demons and shut out the Iggles and their chance for a First Round Bye 24-0. The Eagles had to fly out to Philly after the game and fly in to Dallas again this week despite not staying in nearby Mexico on the dime of a certain quarterback on their roster with the name of Ron Mexico.

In the regular season, the Cowboys defeated the Eagles twice on their way to the NFC East title. Can they beat them a third time? You know what they say about beating a team thrice - it is nearly impossible. Or is it? Twelve of the 19 times the team who swept the regular season, won the 3rd game.

As for Dallas, the last team they had a chance to beat a team three times in the same season was in 1998. They ultimately lost to the Arizona Cardinals in the Wild Card Round after besting them twice in the regular season. And of course, in 2007-2008, they beat a Giants team twice in the regular season before losing in the NFC Divisional Round and were but a speed bump on Big Blue's way to Super Bowl glory.

Cowboys Can Win If: Tony Romo can exorcise his playoff demons and the 19th-ranked pass defense can avoid the big play from Donovan McNabb to DeSean Jackson, like they did on Sunday. They will also need to avoid costly Flozell Adams penalties and kicker Shaun Suisham will need to avoid imploding.

Philadelphia Can Win If: DeSean Jackson and Jeremy Maclin can make the simple catches that they missed last week and the secondary makes the tackles that they missed. A healthy dosage of blitzing from every angle like the Jim Johnson defense of yesteryear will also be needed to disrupt and frustrate Romo. Without the heavy blitzing, Romo will beat you, as evidenced on Sunday.

My Prediction: This game will be closer to the 20-16 Week 9 affair than Week 17's game. I liked Philly's game plan on Sunday but they just couldn't execute. There is no way that this poor execution will be replicated. They are too good of a team. Romo will have 2 TDs but also throw 3 INTs. McNabb will throw for one, Westbrook run for one, and Jackson will run back the other. The difference will be a seemingly innocuous first half field goal.

Philly: 24
Dallas: 21

Baltimore Ravens (+3.5) at New England Patriots, Sunday, 1PM EST, CBS:

The Patriots were my preseason pick to win the Super Bowl. And they were my pick to win the Super Bowl at 12:59 EST on Sunday of Week 17. But then the hahhts of Bawston were-ah broken when Wes Welkah had his knee blown out and my picks were facked. In regular American English, the genius Bill Belichick decided to play Wes Welker, in a meaningless game against the Texans and Welker, Brady's favorite receiver and the yang to Randy Moss's yin, subsequently tore his ACL and MCL on the Pats' first drive of the game. I guess I could put it in a simpler and more vulgar manner--the Patriots are fucked and the downward spiral of Boston athletics continues.

If the Pats don't lose against Baltimore, they surely will lose in the Divisional Round. Julian Edelman is no Welker. Teams will double Moss on every play. The Patriots did have the 12th ranked run offense in the league, but that was with Welker. And Baltimore's Run D, at #5 in the NFL ain't too shabby.

Patriots Can Win If: Edelman turns into Welker and Randy Moss has 3 TDs. Or Moss has 2 TDs and the Pats score multiple Defensive TDs. Big Ben Watson must also pick up some of Welker's possession catches.

Ravens Can Win If: 2nd Year QB Joe "Skinny" Flacco limits his INTs while playing at the hostile Razor and Ray Rice runs rabidly. Also, WRs Mason and Clayton will have to come up with a key catch sooner or later - surely not the most dependable WR duo in football. On defense, double team Moss most plays. When he isn't doubled, triple team him. Hit him early and hard and he will probably give up.

My Prediction: In front of the cold, hostile Bawstonians, Flacco, Rice and Ray Lewis tell the Patriots "Nevermore." Brady plays like Brady with 2 TDs, but ultimately the absence of Welker is too much for them to overcome as the Ravens D shuts down any modicum of a Patriots rush attack.

Ravens: 20
Patriots: 17

Green Bay Packers (+1.5) at Arizona Cardinals, Sunday, 4:40PM EST, FOX:

Another Week 17 rematch--last week the 5th-seeded Packers crushed the 4th seeded Cardinals 33-7 with Matt Leinart and my fellow BC alum Brian St. Pierre (who may have the best job in the world) at the helm in Glendale. Cardinals coach Ken Whisenhunt decided to go with a plain gameplan so as not to tip the hand of this week's gameplan.

Last year, as a Falcons fan, I salivated at playing the Cardinals on Wild Card weekend. Well, the Cardinals won the game. Next up, the Carolina Panthers were booking their flights for the NFC Championship. The Cardinals couldn't possibly win a fucking playoff game on the road, could they? Of course they could. Shame on everyone for thinking elsewise. And from there they continued to defy football fans across the globe by adding to Andy McNabb's NFC Championship Game losses and coming within a miraculous Roethlisberger to Santanio Holmes touchdown from becoming Super Bowl XLIII champions.

Will this year's Cardinals team also begin a Super Bowl run by beating a 5th seeded team, who many believe are better, and with a talented young QB making his first ever playoffs start (Aaron Rodgers)? While it may seem like fate dictates such, the Cardinals injury list may defeat such.

Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie, the standout Cardinals CB, bruised his left knee in Week 17 and is questionable. The Cardinals leader in INTs will be needed to shut down the prolific Packers passing attack; so too will defensive end Calais Campbell who broke his thumb and is expected to play with a cast. WR Anquan Boldin, who surpassed 1,000 receiving yards for the fifth time in his career during the game, was injured in the 3rd Quarter after Cardinals coach Ken Whisenhunt inexplicably left him in, sprained his left ankle. Boldin, a true gamer, expects to be ready to go. The Cardinals need all of their receiving corps to spread thin the Packers pass defense that ranked 5th in the NFL (their rush D led the league).

Cardinals Can Win If: Boldin plays, thereby enabling Larry Fitzgerald to does his best impression of the 2009 Playoffs. The absence of Boldin will also make it that much easier for the Packers to stop the Cardinals' anemic 28th-ranked ground game. Rodgers-Cromartie will also need to play as the Cardinals will need multiple turnovers.

Packers Can Win If: Aaron Rodgers doesn't have 3+ turnovers.

My Prediction: Rodgers doesn't have 3+ turnovers and the Packers 2nd ranked overall defense shuts down the Cardinals offense.

Packers: 24
Cardinals: 10

Enjoy the games with family and friends and good luck with all of your betting! If I have any credibility left, look out for my Divisional Round previews.

Morning Linkaround

Time to pull together some odds and ends, friends:

It appears that Kevin Towers will be joining the Yankees as a consultant in 2010. Why only a consultant? Because if he had a higher title, he wouldn't be able to continue collecting his salary from the Padres. How's that for revenue sharing, San Diego?

Just like he did last winter with Robinson Cano in the Dominican Repbulic, Kevin Long is already working with players on their swings. Long has already visited Nick Swisher, is working with A-Rod this week and Curtis Granderson in the near future.

The Replacement Level Yankees Weblog compares the 2008 and 2009 Yankees defenses. Hopefully there will be another jump forward in 2010.

In light of David Cone's departure from YES, Larry from the Yankeeist gives his thoughts on the broadcasts and wonders whether we'll ever see a true sabermetrician in the booth.

After covering each team in the AL East individually, the folks at Beyond the Box Score have taken to comparing them using their slick DiamondView graphic. The Yankees lead in both on base ability and power, while the Rays have the best fielding and baserunning. The Red Sox run second in each of those categories, making them the jack of all trades but the master of none. And there's nothing wrong with that.

River Ave. Blues presents their long-awaited Jesus Montero prospect profile.

A-Rod reportedly has a new lady friend, a 25 year old Miami socialite named Elaine Spottswood. Over/Under on this one: 2 Weeks.

Alex Remmington at Big League Stew tells you everything you need to know about UZR.

First up in the BBWAA backlash category, Deadspin lists the worst Hall of Fame voters. You know how I can tell Barry Petchesky isn't really a baseball fan? There are only three on his list and none of them are Dan Shaugnessey or Jon Heyman.

Ken Rosenthal thinks that, in addition to adding web-based writers to the BBWAA, they should be subtracting voters who are out of touch with the game.

Sky Andrecheck half-jokingly suggests 5 things players can do to improve their chances of getting into the Hall of Fame as a way of pointing out the flaws in the voting. Of the 5, there is only one that a player himself could control and it runs contrary to the interests of the team (working fewer walks).

Lots of words have been spilled about the Expos lately, most notably from Jonah Keri. He recounts some personal memories from his youth at Olympic Stadium during an ode to Tim Raines while Tyler Kepner has a column in the Times today about the former stars who came from Montreal.

And finally, the physics and psychology behind catching a fly ball.

BCS Championship Game

So this should be my final college football post until the fall; but no promises on that. The BCS Championship Game is tonight, with Alabama taking on Texas from the Rose Bowl.

So which running back son of a former Super Bowl winner / convict will hoist the crystal football tonight? Alabama's Heisman Trophy winning Mark Ingram, son of former Giant receiver and current money laundering guest of the state of New York Mark Ingram Sr? Or Texas' Tre Newton, son of the former Cowboy lineman Nate, who was arrested twice in a five week span in 2001 while transporting a grand total of 388 pounds - or 53 pounds more than his playing weight - of marijuana?

Tune into to ABC at 8 to find out. I think the Crimson Tide is going to take it, and I don't think it's going to be particularly close.

Jonathan Papelbon & His "Brain"

The man of a million mixed metaphors has spoken, which means we have listened. This time, he chatted with ESPN's Gordon Edes (at times in Pig Latin) to discuss his future son, his unawareness of the Red Sox offseason moves, his contract situation and more:

Papelbon's wife, Ashley, is pregnant with the couple's second child, a brother for toddler daughter Parker. The child is due in April.

"Got a name picked out,'' Papelbon says. "Gunner Roberts. The significance? Nothing, man. Just a badass name, so we went with it.''

Gunner Roberts Papelbon. Other "badass" names that just missed the cut:

• Bear Grylls Papelbon
• Shooter Blaze Papelbon
• Rambo Rocky Papelbon
• Cannonball Titcomb Papelbon
• Jason Bourne Papelbon
• Maximus Damien Papelbon
• Thunder Zeus Papelbon
• Axl Rodstock Papelbon
• Hulk Hogan Papelbon
• Rowdy Rocco Papelbon
• Magnús VerMagnússon Papelbon
• Tyrannosaurus Rex Papelbon

If we missed any, leave them in the comments.

"I had no idea we got [John] Lackey until [trainer Mike] Reinold came down to see me, just a few days ago,'' he said. "I swear to you. I don't know anything about the ballclub, but I know the words to the 'Mickey Mouse Clubhouse' song.''

Adrian Beltre deal? He hadn't heard. Casey Kotchman about to be traded to the Mariners? Nope. Mike Cameron? "Cameron, Mike Cameron?'' he said. "We got him? I swear to you, I didn't know.''

The skeptic might recall how Papelbon insisted that his dog ate the ball with which the Red Sox clinched the 2007 World Series -- a story that smacked of urban legend -- but Papelbon pleads that his ignorance is real.

Only a true intellectual pleads for others to acknowledge his true ignorance.

It was not for a lack of trying. The Red Sox last winter offered their closer a two-year deal for about $14.75 million, within a couple hundred thousand dollars of what Papelbon was seeking, according to a source close to the negotiations. "I ixnayed their offer,'' Papelbon said.

If his defense, Pig Latin is a Romance Language to people from Mississippi.

"Heck yeah, as far as what me and my brain are thinking,'' Papelbon said, "but I haven't even sat down with my agents [Seth and Sam Levinson] yet. We don't even have a number in place. There haven't been any discussions between me and the Red Sox and my agents at all.''

Jonathan Papelbon and his brain. Quite the image, isn't it?