Dusty Baker Suspended For Stupidity?

Before our very eyes, a revolutionary series of events is unfolding people!  Major League Baseball has begun suspending managers for making complete retarded in-game decisions!!

Dusty Baker was suspended for two games!  No doubt this is for his decision to make Adam Dunn sacrifice bunt late in a game a few days ago!

For those of you who aren't aware of this situation, it's the second time this season that Dusty's told a power hitter to bunt in a late-game situation.  And it's the second time that the power hitter has failed to get a bunt down, and instead hit a walk-off home run with 2 strikes.

The first time, Edwin Encarnacion did it about 6 seconds after Jeff Brantley told the world how 'un-clutch' Encarnacion was, and suggested pinch hitting for him in late-and-close situations.

I haven't actually READ this article about Baker's suspension.  He probably got suspended for something stupid like bumping and ump... but I'm holding out hope that MLB is punishing him for doing the baseball-equivalent of soliciting a tranny hooking and thinking that 'she' is actually a woman.

Just for the sake of background on this situation, Adam Dunn has hit 250 career homers (and averages 40 a season) and has a grand total of 2 career sac hits.

Encarnacion has 48 homers, developing power and a total of zero career sacs.

My deepest sympathies go out to everybody who's team has ever been coached by Dusty Baker.  I cannot imagine how you have suffered.

Apparently Idiocy Can Breed...

Do you look at the world around you and realize that the average person seems to get dumber every year? Yeah, me too. So where is all this raw stupidity coming from? There's only one solution. Jeff Passan's columns on Yahoo Sports are to brain cells, what kryptonite is to Superman. You don't even have to read them. You just have to be near them and your IQ errodes. Case in point...

The way Curtis Granderson figures, leadoff hitters actually lead off only once a game, so all of the attention they garner – it’s them and cleanup hitters with the recognizable nicknames, after all – isn’t necessarily warranted.

Yeah, and the studies have sorta shown that batting order really doesn't impact the output of the offense. That's where you're going with this, right?

Perhaps it was the romantic notion of the leadoff hitter: the scrapper who fouls off pitches and gets on base and dashes from first to third and manufactures runs, intangibles idealized.

And of course, the key component here is "gets on base" because your leadoff man gets the most at bats on the team, and thereby has the opportunity to make the most outs... so you should strive to use someone who makes less outs than the average player?

Oddly, Rickey Henderson was the best at this. I don't know how scrappy he was. And nobody ever talks about his "intangibles."

That player, of course, is a relic in the steroid and sabermetric eras, generally inefficient, and the prototype has evolved into Leadoff 2.0, the type of player Granderson and others across the game embody.

You're right. Rickey Henderson is a relic, but that's only because he's like 900 years old and nobody as good as him has come around again. Sabermetrics has most certainly never even IMPLIED that a guy who "fouls off pitches and gets on base and goes from first to third and manufactures runs" is inefficient. Sabermetrics has shown us that getting on base is incredibly valuable. It's also showed us how overrated stolen bases were.

And steroids? If anything, guys were taking steroids to try to do these things better. Getting on base more? Hello!!!! The poster child for steroids had an On-Base Percentage of like 2.842 or better for the last 10 years. No typo. Barry Bonds got on base 2.8 times per at bat. He was that fucking retarded.

They can run, yes, but they also hit for serious power, enough that they’d fit just fine in the No. 3 hole, the lineup’s true glamour spot.

We're talking about Curtis Granderson here? He of the .342 career OBP? Okay, that's not shitty, but it's also not what I want in the leadoff spot. And looking at last year, wouldn't the Tigers have been better off batting Granderson down in the lineup a little, where his 38 doubles, 23 triples and 23 homers could have produced more than 74 RBIs? And batting Placido Polanco (and his .388 OBP) first? Nah, you're right... it probably wouldn't make much of a difference anyway.

“You could have your old-school taking pitches so you get the pitch count up and let the hitters behind you see everything the pitcher has."

Yeah Curtis, working counts sounds like a good idea. Sure, this is an old school approach, but effective. Plus the more pitches you see, the more likely you are to draw a hit or walk, and thus, get on base.

"But if you’re a guy who can drive the baseball, you’re going to be aggressive and set the tone by either getting on base, getting an extra-base hit or, possibly, starting the game off 1-0.”

This season, Curtis is driving the ball to the tune of a .242 average and a .320 OBP, and he's on pace for 140+ strikeouts again. That's just what you want from the guy who hits before your run-producers. Keep trying to be Alfonso Soriano, Curtis. It's helping you.

His divisional and positional peer, Cleveland’s Grady Sizemore, socked 92 extra-base hits the year before.

Except that Sizemore got on base at a .390 clip last year, which is the kind of number you should want from the guy who sees the most at bats on the team.

And we can’t forget the leadoff hitter who best epitomizes the power surge – and the most misplaced – Alfonso Soriano, who must be telekinetic with his ability to convince manager after manager that keeping him hitting first is a stroke of brilliance.

Telekinetic? That's moving shit with your mind. MIND POWER!!! And suddenly I got an image of Alfonso Soriano giving Lou Pinella a telekinetic hand-job. The visual in my brain is like bad Star Wars porn right now.

The important thing here, is that Passan is writing an article praising Curtis Granderson and the "new breed" of power-hitting leadoff guys... and he ADMITS that Soriano is "misplaced" in the Cubs lineup, thus contradicting his entire fucking premise. This is why these posts are so long.

It [foot-speed] is managers’ last gasp at the classic leadoff hitter instead of one who resembles Rickey Henderson, baseball’s greatest power-and-speed combination at the top of the lineup since Ty Cobb.

Then here's the real question. What was more vital to Rickey Henderson's success? His "power-and-speed"? Or his ability to work counts, draw walks, and get on base?

Case in point... Henderson hit 297 career home runs. And stole 1406 bases at a success rate of just under 81%. For his career, he averaged a home run every 45 plate appearances. And as we know, stealing bases at an 81% rate really doesn't help an offense very much (because people have researched these facts extensively, and we trust facts.)

Power-and-speed: 1 homer every 45 times at the plate, minimal benefit from stolen bases.

Rickey on-based .401 for his career, with peaks of .420, .419, .423, .439, .432 and another .423 at 40 years old. In 25 seasons, Henderson made more than 400 outs 6 times. Alfonso Soriano, in comparison, has made 400+ outs in every full season he's ever played and has broken 500 twice. Juan Pierre has made 500+ outs in 5 straight years.

Walking/Getting On Base: Once every 4 games, Rickey Henderson is on base when Curtis Granderson is sitting on the bench after having made an out.

“I had Bonds hit a lot of leadoff home runs,” Leyland said.

Jim Leyland, speaking proudly about batting Barry Bonds in the lead-off spot... but at least Bonds was getting on base at an above-average rate. Still fucking stupid.

No one said being Leadoff 2.0 is easy. Which is just how Granderson likes it.

Umm... what? No one said it's easy? Which is just how he likes it? What are you saying here Jeff Passan? Are you saying that he likes it easy? So then Curtis Granderson hates being "Leadoff 2.0" because it's not easy, and he likes it easy?

Wit only looks witty if it makes sense dude.

Bush League!!

Few people know this, but one of my favorite things in the sport of baseball is when somebody calls something "Bush League."

Here are the two latest examples. And here's the other one.

Sounds like sour grapes from a couple of mediocre players who lost the respective games. Know what I think is Bush League?

Giving up 6 runs (4 earned) on 5 hits and 5 walks in 5 innings against the Washington Nationals. Know what else is Bush League? Pitching in Taiwan because major league teams don't want you.

As for Dellucci, know what I think is Bush? Having a career OPS+ of 101. Know what else is Bush? Having a baseball career that's best compared by age (by baseballreference.com) to that hitting stud Cito Gaston!!

For the record, here's the closest thing to -real- BUSH LEAGUE!

David Dellucci needs to shut the fuck up. He's your typical, not-very-good-white-guy-with-a-reputation-as-a-grinder. He's gritty and gutty and gritty mcgutty gritten guts. And if his skin had any pigment at all, he'd probably be out of baseball, because apparently pigmented skin is the anti-grit. You're not Old School. You just suck.

And as for Nelson Figueroa, I don't buy into all that "heartwarming story" shit about this guy traversing the globe to try to get back into the majors. I don't care. He's a mediocre pitcher at best, which is why nobody wants him for very long. He has a job because Omar Minaya likes Latin players and he was available.

If you're a shitty player... and you get shown up by better players who are in the process of kicking your ass... do yourself a favor. Have some class and just shut the fuck up. Be the bigger man or something. You know all about moral victories... because you're a loser. So take one here and go away.

D'Antoni Is Wrong for the Knicks?

Today I get a real treat. I get to talk about one of my hometown teams and an article from my hometown paper! One great thing about the New York Daily News, is that there's no shortage of stupidity to be found within it.
(Actually, there is a "shortage" of stupidity, and his name is Mike Lupica... but for more on that, check out http://www.enough-lupica.com/)

Onto the premise of things though. Mitch Lawrence thinks Donnie Walsh is an idiot for hiring Mike D'Antoni. Mitch Lawrence is so certain of this, that he's invented a really witty nickname for Donnie Walsh. Bold Donnie. Bold Donnie? Bold Donnie!

Note to self: Bold = Nice way to call someone an asshole.


(Note, that's not me. And probably not you.)

Bold Donnie strikes again.

We get it Mitch, you think he's an asshole. I already explained it.

Mike D'Antoni coaching the Knicks? What's next, trading for Shaquille O'Neal to come in and play point guard?

D'Antoni : Coach = Shaq : Point Guard? These two things are very clearly similar. Plus this is topical, because Shaq got traded to the Suns this year. And D'Antoni was the coach of the Suns! This might actually work! Shaq played in D'Antoni's system, he's been around Nash a little, and aside from the fact that he's 7'2", 685 lbs, and can't dribble or shoot, he'd probably create mismatches all over the place.

Here's a better one: Make D'Antoni the GM of the Knicks, too.

You mean so he can trade for and sign guys suited to play into his system? That's a very intelligent suggestion, but you were being sarcastic, weren't you Mitch? You cheeky little monkey.

Even Walsh has to look at a reduced role now. His drafts and signings at Indiana over the better part of a quarter of a century reflected the old NBA way of thinking (incidentally, the kind that keeps producing championships, but why let facts get in the way of a good fantasy?).

Donnie Walsh is Old School. Mike D'Antoni is not. Old School wins Championships. Cut. And. Dry. Suck on that you New School pricks.

Just for the sake of reference, I'm going to break this down in a way that's easily understandable.
Number of Teams Playing D'Antoni's Style: 2 (Suns, Raptors)
Number of Team-Seasons teams have played D'Antoni's Style: 5 (Suns - 4, Raptors - 1)
Playoff Appearances: 5
Championships: 0

Number of Teams Playing "Old School": All of the other ones.
Number of Team-Seasons teams have played "Old School": 5,234,230,921,928,289
Playoff Appearances: Roughly 27% of all teams in the history of the NBA, with roughly 73% of them missing the playoffs.
Championships: All of them.

Seems to me, Mitch, that the reason "Old School" wins Championships... is because that's all ANYBODY ELSE PLAYS according to you. Your analogy implies that there are two types of basketball: "Old School" and "D'Antoni School" (which sounds like a culinary arts academy.)

The Showtime Lakers? The Phil Jackson Triangle Offense-driven Bulls Teams? You're telling me that these aren't different from say... the hard-nosed defense, team-first approach of the San Antonio Spurs? You're skating on thin ice Mitch Lawrence.

The Knicks are now a new-wave team, so they had better adjust on all fronts and go all the way with this.

New Wave? Okay, lets go with New Wave. Here are some ways to adjust to being New Wave. The Knicks are no longer a basketball team. They're an 80's ska band.

Diaw is D'Antoni's kind of player: a soft, finesse convertible type who can play 17 positions and defend none.

Diaw is really soft. He missed 11 games last season because his pussy hurt and 5 more because he was really bloated. The 17 positions he can play are: Shooting Guard, Small Forward, Power Forward, Center, Left Field, Goalie, Striker, Left Outside Linebacker, Shortstop, Catcher, Doggie Style, 69, Administrative Assistant, Punter, Reverse Cowgirl, and Porn Fluffer.

The smiles you see are from NBA officials who now will get their wish of having the Knicks draft the "next Dirk Nowitzki" out of Outer Mongolia.

Really? Who is he! That would be an excellent player for the Knicks to grab up. Although I think they'll probably take Derrick Rose if he's there for them.

Here's what this comes down to. Everybody's pointing out that the Knicks don't have any players who can play D'Antoni's style, aside from maybe Nate Robinson, Jamal Crawford, David Lee, Renaldo Balkman and Wilson Chandler. Curry and Randolph can't run, their tits will jiggle too much.

The better question is: How many of these guys can play "Old School" basketball? How many of them can play defense? None. NONE!!

N. O. N. E.

So what's better? Having 4 or 5 guys who can play into the system? Or none? D'Antoni's won without defense for the last 4 years. The Knicks have lost playing "Old School" for the last 700 years. Why not try something new?