Hey inside-people-who-have-access-to-private-information, I respect your decisions to release information that is supposed to be secret, as long as it doesn't compromise the team in any way *cough* Ricciardi *cough*. You know, it's good for the media and it's entertaining for us fans and stuff. Especially when we're waiting for interesting front-office type news to think about. But really, when the information is just plainly false... why?
This is different from writers speculating on who the prospects involved in the Halladay blockbuster may have been. This was a bunch of supposedly reliable news sources releasing what turned out to be a non-signing as official news and placing Castro on the list of players on the Jays' roster. Mike Wilner
somehow figured out the truth amid the madness (as mad as news about 1 year contract for a backup catcher can be). No wonder bluejays.com never released any news on the Castro thing although my previous post is now contaminated by a falsehood. Darn. Good thing I disclaimered it and whatnot. You can never be too safe these days. No... you can never trust anyone these days. No... you can never trust anyone with anything safe - I don't know. Just please stop leaking things that aren't true.
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Someone Should Tell Mr. Anthopoulos That This Isn't Playstation
But hey, you know what? I'm perfectly fine with an exciting offseason. And it's nice to know that it's not illegal for the Jays to trade baseball players. I'm impressed with the way the brand-spankin'-new GM was able to go about the Halladay trade and execute what experts see as a fair deal, impressed he was able to stake his reputation on a couple of risky "challenge" trades, acquiring high-upside players in Wallace and Morrow, and impressed at his ability to multitask and get some contracts done while this was all happening. The free agent signings of John Buck and Ramon Castro (I think that was his name - BlueJays.com never even announced that he was signed. Some other news sources say that they signed him. But don't take my word - this is not exactly a reliable news source. Heck, we don't claim to offer news and we're not exactly a "source" of anything. Crap, that was a long bracket) alone outdid what Ricciardi had done in his last offseason as GM (Kevin Millar and... uh... Raul Chavez. And 7 games of Michael Barrett. The Jays also got Joey Gathright and Lance Broadway, whose name alone ALSO outdoes whatever Ricciardi is worth or whatever).
Don't get me wrong, I actually kind of appreciated what Ricciardi did while he was here. He put together a very good, cheap bullpen by snagging no-name minor leaguers and letting the coaching staff transform them into average or above average relievers (Downs, Carlson, Tallet to name a few, and even Wolfe had his moments) and was unfairly blamed for the Wells contract (Godfrey, was it?). The Thomas and Ryan signings, however, I never liked. Now that Anthopoulos has taken over and quickly and quietly made some major moves with the promise of more just around the corner, we now see what Ricciardi could never accomplish.
Ricciardi's inability to trade Halladay really was nothing when compared with some of the other non-trades in his past. There have been rumours that he could have been able to get David Wright for Ted Lilly or Ryan Howard for Ted Lilly and it has all but been confirmed that his insatiable appetite for attention, his big-mouthed blabbering to the media killed the Rios-Lincecum deal. To think that Lincecum could be on the team essentially for free, since Rios was subsequently dumped on the White Sox, is beyond words. And consider this - Halladay would not have looked for greener pastures if they had put together a contending team. Although then we'd probably still have Ricciardi, which, well, would suck.
Ricciardi managed to entertain me for one offseason. And even then, the signings were less than impressive. Before the 2006 season, the drama that went on with the AJ and BJ signings and the Overbay trade were enough to make me get over the fact that I follow the Leafs. I never liked the BJ Ryan signing -$47 million for a reliever? Beyond ridiculous. They essentially ended up paying more than half a year's payroll for 70 good innings in a year they didn't make the playoffs. Glad it's not my own money, but still - shit! That almost makes the Wells abomination tolerable, as he's still got a few years to magically stop sucking.
Back to the current offseason. Anthopoulos. Trades. Yeah. Let's see some more of that magic ship guys like Overbay and some but not all of Accardo/Frasor/Downs/Tallet out of town and get some young players with potential back in here. 2009 was a huge waste of a year as soon as that 9-game losing streak started in mid-May. It's pretty cool knowing that 2010 is being piloted by a guy who realizes that his job entails getting good baseball players, and, you know, actually trying to do it. Here's hoping that he doesn't suddenly screw it up and change my opinion of him.
--Cooper
Don't get me wrong, I actually kind of appreciated what Ricciardi did while he was here. He put together a very good, cheap bullpen by snagging no-name minor leaguers and letting the coaching staff transform them into average or above average relievers (Downs, Carlson, Tallet to name a few, and even Wolfe had his moments) and was unfairly blamed for the Wells contract (Godfrey, was it?). The Thomas and Ryan signings, however, I never liked. Now that Anthopoulos has taken over and quickly and quietly made some major moves with the promise of more just around the corner, we now see what Ricciardi could never accomplish.
Ricciardi's inability to trade Halladay really was nothing when compared with some of the other non-trades in his past. There have been rumours that he could have been able to get David Wright for Ted Lilly or Ryan Howard for Ted Lilly and it has all but been confirmed that his insatiable appetite for attention, his big-mouthed blabbering to the media killed the Rios-Lincecum deal. To think that Lincecum could be on the team essentially for free, since Rios was subsequently dumped on the White Sox, is beyond words. And consider this - Halladay would not have looked for greener pastures if they had put together a contending team. Although then we'd probably still have Ricciardi, which, well, would suck.
Ricciardi managed to entertain me for one offseason. And even then, the signings were less than impressive. Before the 2006 season, the drama that went on with the AJ and BJ signings and the Overbay trade were enough to make me get over the fact that I follow the Leafs. I never liked the BJ Ryan signing -$47 million for a reliever? Beyond ridiculous. They essentially ended up paying more than half a year's payroll for 70 good innings in a year they didn't make the playoffs. Glad it's not my own money, but still - shit! That almost makes the Wells abomination tolerable, as he's still got a few years to magically stop sucking.
Back to the current offseason. Anthopoulos. Trades. Yeah. Let's see some more of that magic ship guys like Overbay and some but not all of Accardo/Frasor/Downs/Tallet out of town and get some young players with potential back in here. 2009 was a huge waste of a year as soon as that 9-game losing streak started in mid-May. It's pretty cool knowing that 2010 is being piloted by a guy who realizes that his job entails getting good baseball players, and, you know, actually trying to do it. Here's hoping that he doesn't suddenly screw it up and change my opinion of him.
--Cooper
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Christmas Comes Early for the Raptors
Around last week, I was looking at upcoming Raptors games, and I actually circled us to lose this one. Why? The softies Colangelo has signed to play basketball have no doubt been looking forward to this game for weeks, not because this is a game we could and should (and did) win, but because everyone loves Christmas. We aren't exactly a good team either, faced with a comparably bad team and our lack of mental fortitude, I was sure we would lose.
Well, turns out we won. Surprise, surprise, which also ties us for our season high for win streak. 3 games! 3 games!! Pretty disappointing actually, but we're still slightly better off than last year, and I'd like to think we're trending up instead of down. Of course, we still have another game against the Pistons after Christmas, with a good chance we'll lose.
Early on, despite the 1st quarter lead we showed our lack of toughness. We gave up 9 offensive rebounds in the first quarter. That's about 8 more than it should of been. Luckily for us Bargnani was playing well and even had a block or two. Actually, let's call it Italy night, even Belinelli played well in his best game in weeks. The rest of the game we slowly outplayed the Pistons and by the 4th quarter we had a 20 point game.
Enjoy the holidays.
Monday, December 21, 2009
The Power of the Written Word
Yeah, I see the irony in writing something about "writing" and "power" in a blog that no one has ever read yet. It's kind of like how North Korea is the only Korea with "Democratic" in its name. Regardless, I've got to rant on this, especially with some of the recent media developments that have annoyed the crap out of me.
The Halladay Trade Rumours - Looking Back at that Madness
Probably the most exciting offseason development in recent memory, EVERY SINGLE POSSIBLE COMBINATION of top Phillies and Mariners prospects were mentioned as going to the Blue Jays. That's fine, that's entertaining, that makes for a good story. But for goodness' sake, (don't pluralize the "sake", by the way; that's just dumb) these reporters have gone overboard with saying that their stupid guesses come from "sources".
Heck, the Toronto Star's Richard Griffin went ahead and said that the "most likely" candidates to join Toronto were J.A. Happ, Michael Saunders and Phillippe Aumont. Richard Griffin applauded the front office for acquiring these players. Not only did NONE of these three end up in Toronto, but Griffin then says that the actual deal, revealed the next day, was worse. Kyle Drabek, Travis D'Arnaud and Brett Wallace for a $6 million that hadn't been disclosed earlier? It seems as if he has a typical Philly man-crush on a 27-year old rookie with a .251 BABIP against. I'm not saying that Happ couldn't hold down a regular job in the AL East, but he's hardly the exciting type of player one would like to see in return for the best pitcher in the game.
And what's with Bob Elliott telling us just as the trade was set to be finalized that someone failed their physical? Is getting some last minute attention worth sacrificing your reporter credibility? Or does none of that matter anymore?
Ridiculous Stats So Ridiculous That Only Ridiculous Writers And Their Fucked-Up Readers Could Believe
Anyways, I've strayed from my original point. Today, the Star displayed a statistic that Ryan Miller's save percentage against the Leafs in his last 9 games or so (I forget how many, but so what - I'm ranting and it's close enough) is a mind-fucking .996. That's 99.6%. That means for every 1000 shots against, FOUR would go in. To put that in perspective, a team averaging 25 shots a game would take HALF A SEASON to score 4 goals at that rate. And then the Star says his GAA was 1.67 or something. That would mean the Leafs were averaging 417 shots per game against him. That wasn't just a typo on their part. They wrote it twice in the same article. Doing shit like that is bound to mess up the minds of the more mathematically-challenged readers in the world. Shit like that is bound to get them to argue with rational people and use messed up published stats to back up their arguments. And when they get called out on those faulty stats, they'll be able to back up their stupid claims with actual newspapers and rub their own perceived superiority in the faces of rational people. The thought of that makes me crnge so hard I omitted a vowel from a word. And that's coming from someone who would use misprinted stats like that to mess with stupid people who want to argue.
-Cooper
The Halladay Trade Rumours - Looking Back at that Madness
Probably the most exciting offseason development in recent memory, EVERY SINGLE POSSIBLE COMBINATION of top Phillies and Mariners prospects were mentioned as going to the Blue Jays. That's fine, that's entertaining, that makes for a good story. But for goodness' sake, (don't pluralize the "sake", by the way; that's just dumb) these reporters have gone overboard with saying that their stupid guesses come from "sources".
Heck, the Toronto Star's Richard Griffin went ahead and said that the "most likely" candidates to join Toronto were J.A. Happ, Michael Saunders and Phillippe Aumont. Richard Griffin applauded the front office for acquiring these players. Not only did NONE of these three end up in Toronto, but Griffin then says that the actual deal, revealed the next day, was worse. Kyle Drabek, Travis D'Arnaud and Brett Wallace for a $6 million that hadn't been disclosed earlier? It seems as if he has a typical Philly man-crush on a 27-year old rookie with a .251 BABIP against. I'm not saying that Happ couldn't hold down a regular job in the AL East, but he's hardly the exciting type of player one would like to see in return for the best pitcher in the game.
And what's with Bob Elliott telling us just as the trade was set to be finalized that someone failed their physical? Is getting some last minute attention worth sacrificing your reporter credibility? Or does none of that matter anymore?
Ridiculous Stats So Ridiculous That Only Ridiculous Writers And Their Fucked-Up Readers Could Believe
Anyways, I've strayed from my original point. Today, the Star displayed a statistic that Ryan Miller's save percentage against the Leafs in his last 9 games or so (I forget how many, but so what - I'm ranting and it's close enough) is a mind-fucking .996. That's 99.6%. That means for every 1000 shots against, FOUR would go in. To put that in perspective, a team averaging 25 shots a game would take HALF A SEASON to score 4 goals at that rate. And then the Star says his GAA was 1.67 or something. That would mean the Leafs were averaging 417 shots per game against him. That wasn't just a typo on their part. They wrote it twice in the same article. Doing shit like that is bound to mess up the minds of the more mathematically-challenged readers in the world. Shit like that is bound to get them to argue with rational people and use messed up published stats to back up their arguments. And when they get called out on those faulty stats, they'll be able to back up their stupid claims with actual newspapers and rub their own perceived superiority in the faces of rational people. The thought of that makes me crnge so hard I omitted a vowel from a word. And that's coming from someone who would use misprinted stats like that to mess with stupid people who want to argue.
-Cooper
To Rant or Not To Rant: Why the hell am I starting this blog with a cliche?
To Rant...
Here's what our friends at dictionary.reference.com have to say about the word:
–verb (used without object)
1.
to speak or declaim extravagantly or violently; talk in a wild or vehement way; rave: The demagogue ranted for hours.
–verb (used with object)
2.
to utter or declaim in a ranting manner.
–noun
3.
ranting, extravagant, or violent declamation.
4.
a ranting utterance.
Origin: 1590–1600; <>
What have we got here? Well, the first definition of the word isn't too bad. Extravagant, violent, vehement, wild, rave. Words that seem to describe Cito Gaston's logic these days - crap, I promised myself not to start actual posts yet. In any case, that's not a bad way for me to explode verbally, to unleash a lexical diarrhea of sorts upon the uncensored internets, to fire harmless rhetorical missiles at my sports-related targets. I like the root too - "to talk foolishly". While I consider myself generally a sane and logical, rational person, there's gotta be a forum for me to let go of nonsensical, foolish thoughts too right? On that note, 3 of the 4 definitions seem to use variations of the word in its own definition. I freakin' hate that. Especially from as trusted a source as dictionary.com. It's like as blasphemous as if Wikipedia were to misspell some dude's last name.
Don't click that link. It's not actually a misspelling, just a hyperlink there so that I could have a hyperlink in this post.
-Cooper
Here's what our friends at dictionary.reference.com have to say about the word:
–verb (used without object)
1.
to speak or declaim extravagantly or violently; talk in a wild or vehement way; rave: The demagogue ranted for hours.
–verb (used with object)
2.
to utter or declaim in a ranting manner.
–noun
3.
ranting, extravagant, or violent declamation.
4.
a ranting utterance.
Origin: 1590–1600; <>
What have we got here? Well, the first definition of the word isn't too bad. Extravagant, violent, vehement, wild, rave. Words that seem to describe Cito Gaston's logic these days - crap, I promised myself not to start actual posts yet. In any case, that's not a bad way for me to explode verbally, to unleash a lexical diarrhea of sorts upon the uncensored internets, to fire harmless rhetorical missiles at my sports-related targets. I like the root too - "to talk foolishly". While I consider myself generally a sane and logical, rational person, there's gotta be a forum for me to let go of nonsensical, foolish thoughts too right? On that note, 3 of the 4 definitions seem to use variations of the word in its own definition. I freakin' hate that. Especially from as trusted a source as dictionary.com. It's like as blasphemous as if Wikipedia were to misspell some dude's last name.
Don't click that link. It's not actually a misspelling, just a hyperlink there so that I could have a hyperlink in this post.
-Cooper
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)